/lit/ - Literature

>>15574465
>But now you're saying that these things can't exist because no part is useless. So, then, what are the points of these parts? Or are you alleging that they'll become useful in the future?

I already answere all of that in previous posts, maybe you are not smart enought to understand what a gnoseological fallacy is.

>>15574483
>Electrons were part of the ontology of scientists decades before there was any chance of "observing" one, for example. Now how can you "falsify" the existence of electrons? You haven't read a book, it's obvious, stop lying man.
>Spend 15 minutes googling any of this.

Ive heard thise cliche lines so many times, the issue you skip is that electrons are falsifiable and provable and PREDICTABLE, which are the traits of a good scientific theory. None of the mentioned is characteristic of evolution.

>>15574122
>I get it, you hate evolution just because you hate Black people.

Is it the opossite? ones who hate evolution are anti-racist and evolution is white supremacy? What is the official revisionists interpretation these days? >>15572323

>>15574533
>DNA

fu and your strawman.

>>11193843
>I don’t know which of the many ways of falsifying evolution convinced popper

there are none. he cucked out. gotta keep the proffesorship.

>>11193844
>the actual tangible material truth

I FCK LOOOOOVE SCIENCE

>>11193849
suprise, suprise...