Negative Numbers Don't Exist

So this is something that I made up as a joke to make a couple of friends mad and they could never prove this wrong.  Their only defense has been negative numbers exist because they do.  I'm not saying they do not exist but no one has proven this wrong.  It's Dwight's law of Numbers. I want discussion on this, the only responses I have gotten are really bad excuses that they exist just because they do.

This is a bit of a stretch and I was always bad at proofing so lets don some tinfoil hats.  Negative numbers can be represented as positive values.  You never add a negative, you are just subtracting positives.  you can take the square root of a positive but you cannot take the square root of a negative number.  i is represented as the square root of -1.  i is not real.  On number lines and graphs there are negative values but in terms of distance that line is just moving left a positive amount, not right a negative amount.

Let me guess what you are thinking here: "This guy is an idiot".  All I really wanted was people to just think about it and question things but it never happens.  Negative values do not exist in nature.  We invented them to make math easier.  When you are in debt you do not have negative dollars, You owe positive dollars.  At the same time though humans invented math and I could argue positive values do not exist but  will not do that.

When it all boils down negative numbers are used in math and are an abstract concept.  They cannot be found in nature as something that could be represented as a positive.  All I am saying is they are an abstract concept in math that is not real practically.  I invite discussion and want someone to prove me wrong but I want proof and do not want people to just make claims about them existing.

Stevie Wonder is not blind?

I am currently working on a couple of bigger theories involving the Baranstain Bears, and the Titanic so be looking for those.  In the meantime though I will do one on a rather interesting small one revolving around musician Stevie Wonder.  If you do not know who Stevie Wonder is shame on you and get out from under the rock you are clearly living under and listen to his music.  He is a very talented musician who has the claim to fame that he is blind.  This means of course there will be conspiracies that he is not blind. A short trip to Wikipedia shows that he was born blind due to being premature and his retinas detached.

I do not wish to give up hope on there being a juicy conspiracy just yet so put on your tin foil hats and get ready for this:

*As a side note this video does several instant replays and is not necessary to watch the whole thing to get what it is talking about.

If Stevie wonder was blind then how could he grab the mic?  Well to burst your bubble lots of ways.  Seeing as it is a microphone that fell Stevie probably heard Paul bump into it and went to catch it.  Just because he is blind does not mean he is ignorant to what is happening, unlike McCartney who should be looking where he's going and should stop bumping into things.  This performance would have been practiced and Stevie Wonder likely knew that McCartney was going to run by during that part of the song.  If McCartney was clumsy enough to bump into the mic as he ran to the piano for the actual performance he probably did it during rehearsal at least once or twice.  Stevie Wonder probably expected it to happen which could be why he went for the mic.  Although it is an interesting video I think that him not being blind is grasping at straws.  The real blind person here is McCartney, he should look where he is going.

RAINBOWS IN OUR WATER SUPPLY

So as I am sure you are aware blog on conspiracy theories.  I make it my goal to research everything about the theories and post sources to any facts I give.  I try to only do research into theories that I think could actually have ground behind them.  This gives me difficulty because there are some very crazy conspiracy theories with either little ground or nothing behind them.  It is also very difficult to determine if some conspiracy theories are indeed serious and not satire or making things up for entertainment.  I want to do something on the Illuminati but it is nearly impossible to determine if people are serious or not.  Search Illuminati or 9/11 conspiracies on YouTube and you get these great results: http://imgur.com/GFQJA9u.

I mean seriously at least half of this is click bait or obvious satire.  If it is not click-bait it is an MLG montage parody.  Maybe all the click bait is just the Illuminati trying to cover something up. I doubt they would go through all that trouble though.  Anyway due to sifting through the satire I end up working on a few posts at a time and end up posting all of them at once.  I will get better spacing out posts.


Then you have the conspiracies that make no sense.  In my research I have found several conspiracies that are just completely ridiculous. Most of these are too ridiculous or too short to warrant a full post or I think have the potential to be satire.  Others are just grasping at straws.  I still want to feature some of them so from time to time I will be posting mini posts discussing a few short ones at a time while taking more time on bigger conspiracies.

Now that I have sufficiently beaten around the bush let us get to the main event:

RAINBOWS IN OUR WATER SUPPLY

Now this was a video I stumbled across randomly about two weeks ago.  Summarizing it in text does not do it justice.  It is two minutes long just watch it and continue reading once you have seen it.

I honestly cannot make sense in this.  I have watched this video ten times in an effort to figure out if this is satire or if this lady genuinely thinks rainbows are not natural.  At this point I could argue for either side.  Now as of writing this I think it is legir and for a few reasons.  This lady is saying that rainbows are the visible spectrum and not natural if in water like in the video.  People learn about rainbows in 5th grade earth science, and they are very much a natural think and I find it hard to believe that she would not know this.  Yet people as a whole are not known for being smart because of this gem of a video:

If you did not watch the video the lady is arguing that going 80 MPH does not mean you travel 80 miles in an hour.

Could the lady really think rainbows are in the water supply?   Well our journey now takes us to the credits of the video.  Bellow are from the ending where she is trying to get us to rise up against the government.

This is just a little too much in my eye.  If this was not in the credits I would have stuck by that she was serious.  Thirst is spelled wrong and the video never mentioned anything about energy.  This makes me feel it could be satire but at the same time it is very amateurishly made.  I feel someone making satire would have put more thought into making sure there were not background sounds or there were not spelling mistakes.  I am leaning more towards this is real as of writing this post and it was not an easy decision.  Every time I watch the video I change direction but in the end it just feels too real to me.  After it is all said and done though, I do not think anyone is here to say that rainbows cannot be natural.