You must log in or register to comment.
ok, but what about three Youtube videos?
As long as they’re shorts, only showing one vague, unverifiable, third or fourth hand anecdote each.
That makes sense. I heard that my college roommate’s pen pal said something like that.
Are they at least 3rd-hand, (or more) spurious sources with an inscrutable chain of custody, because if not, you can miss with that.
Are they at least 3rd-hand, (or more) spurious sources with an inscrutable chain of custody
Is there any other kind?
Maybe, if they’re from potholer54
It isn’t even better science, it is just more science.
I once saw a cow on a roof. Can science explain that? I didn’t think so.
Counterpoint: nuh-uh (They et. al., good ol’ days).
Citations
They et. al. (Good ol’ days). Trump proves that YouTube videos about The Creator that validate your feelings are equivalent to science. Many People Are Saying, 1(2), 10–20. Things I done heard. https://doi.org/I forget
Indeed, and in addition if your religion is not supported by the facts it’s time to revise its assumptions. Religion can deal with new evidence, it’s just rather slow compared to say human lifetimes. I suspect thats because the basis of many faiths reasoning is built on philosophy, Christianity in particular. Which is a kind of precursor to experimental science where progress is slow or even circular.
I need a tshirt of this
All I gotta say is technology has finally made us dumber
Dude, have you looked out your window? Its so obvious the qorld is flat… /s
- Your favorite celebrity
While they don’t refute it, enough of those do prevent better science from happening though, especially when it’s needed.
N@zi published multiple scientific researches to justify their doings.
Science is important, it helps us solve many of the problems we do not have without science
