So I’ve been watching some videos on the YooToobs about The Flat Earth Society.
In case you are unaware, there exists a “secret” society of individuals who believe that the Earth is flat (not a globe). Members include regular joes and also famous basketball players and celebrities.
Pretty weird, right?
I highly recommend you go watch some videos by these “flat-earthers”. Really listen to their “scientific” arguments.
Some of them are quite intricate and “logical”.
For example: “water always finds its level” and then the flat-earther will go on to ‘splain why, in scientific-sounding terms, why that’s true.
Or… “there is no such thing as gravity” and then go on to explain, in scientific-sounding terms, why heavy objects are more dense than air and that it is that reason — and not gravity — which explains why objects fall to the ground.
If you are just the right amount of ignorant about physics (and trust me, you don’t need to be THAT ignorant about physics), then these arguments will stop and make you say “hmmmmmm”.
But, of course, if you’re a “round earther”, or a “globalist” you might think: “David, this is stoopid. I KNOW the earth is round. EVERYBODY knows the earth is round.”
But do you? Do you REALLY KNOW?
Recently, The Discovery Channel did some experiments involving a boat, a high-powered laser, a precise (digital) level, a telescope, and a helicopter, to demonstrate that the Earth is indeed a globe and not flat (just in case you were on the fence about that).
The funny thing is… while the flat-earthers bury people in good-sounding surface logic, the Discovery Channel used a few high-tech tools and simple observational methods to demonstrate the Earth has a curvature in every direction (meaning, you could verify results simply by observation).
Point?
Only that proof *starts* with observation and quite often… a demonstration.
Sometimes people take for granted things which *seem* obvious (but are not) or… they make up clever stories for things which have no basis in reality but… it sounds good… it sounds “logical.”
But… if there is no way to observe something, there is no way to connect logical dots.
But, there are plenty of ways to construct “a priori” arguments that SOUND good and logical.
Speaking of which, a similar problem exists in finance. There is no shortage of theories about why you should be able to earn this rate of return in the stock market or expect the real estate market to do such and such, or why it’s easy to make it big in FOREX or why precious metals are a sure-fire thing.
Unbeknownst to some, and beknownst to a few, there are actually predictive models that have successfully predicted the probability of earning any given return in the stock market.
The research was done 25 years ago and… has be correct up to the present day within a reasonable degree of error.
Here’s what I mean:
A lot of financial advisors will tell you that it’s reasonable to expect the stock market to return 8% to 10% over the next 30 years. Usually, the good-sounding logic goes something like this: “the stock market has historically performed at such and such a level, therefore, it’s reasonable to expect it to perform at such and such a level in the future.”
But… a few high-tech calculators and some simple observational methods typically dissolve all such good-sounding surface logic, leaving a few basic financial tools which work as reliably as the Earth, spinning on its axis.
The data is pretty clear and there is lots and lots and lots of it.
Anyway, one of those reliable financial tools is life insurance. Specifically, whole life insurance.
It’s primary reason for being is to protect the value of income and savings that you cannot afford to lose.
And it does it in a most eloquent and mathematically precise way.
If you want to know more about it, go read the guide: