/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15051347
>One of his primary goals in Physics is to make distinctions between natural cause (as occurs naturally in nature) and artificial creation (made for a specific cause or purpose, from elements of nature), and if you can't see the huge importance these distinctions would have in the physical world, and to all the sciences, you are, again, just stupid.
>If you can't see why this is important I'm not going to tell you.
a child can understand the difference between a tree growing and a builder making a house. a^2 + b^2 = c^2 is infinitely more impressive an observation than 8 books of "dude motion lmao"

> and none of his obersvations are as base and trivial as you've illustrated here.
Bullshit. The few intelligible claims you can get out of his word soup is trivial. His four causes are not profound in any way. Making a shore-mounted death ray that you can aim at an incoming fleet, on the other hand, is bad-ass. Pic related is an actual accomplishment. "Philosophers" have always been losers. The further you get from practicality, the bigger nothing you are.