/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15717715
absolutely

>>15717715
No. Science will continue to decay until it becomes indistinguishable from other religions.

>>15717715
"Science" as an institution of academia is just a cult of empiricism.
>do you have an approved source for that?
>I'm sorry, but we just couldn't reproduce those results
>oh, my theory needs to be reproducible? sorry, sweetie, not the way it works
>um, that's not falsifiable
>no, my theory doesn't need to be falsifiable, the science is settled
Science as an idea is great, but humans suck so scientists suck.

>>15717715

>>15717715
it do be like that

>>15717715
Science is purposefully stifled.
After they had to spend billions on (ongoing) nuclear non-proliferation effort, world leaders decided science is too dangerous to keep going unrestricted.

>>15717715
His dad was an admiral

>>15718317
You're thinking of Jim Morrison, Zappa's father was a chemist

>>15717715
He couldn't know how successful sciencefrauds were and that people are willing to pay taxes for even the dumbest fear porn.

>>15717715

Yes.

>>15718268
What is the name of the supernatural creator being it will have to appeal to in order to satisfy that condition?

>>15718425
>my irrational belief system has no supernatural creator so it can't be a religion
It's a religion functionally.

>>15718270
No, that is only half the story, if it were only a cult of empiricism, it wouldn't have peer review, it would just posit that everything you feel is the correct feeling for you, as it is, it is an infinite feedback loop of subjective empiricism and objective measurement in order to square internal inductive and external deductive logic together.

>>15718428
No, a religion is specifically defined as a collective organized belief/worship of supernatural entities, so by definition can not be something that has no supernatural beings being worshiped. It might function like a cult if everything were centralized, but its not and its definitely not a religious one.

>>15718435
>No, a religion is specifically defined as hurr durr insert irrelevant semantical cope
I don't care. Your belief system is functionally a religion.

>>15718442
If it were functionally a religion, you would be able to name the being it worships to function as one, but you can't so you just seethe and continue to act retarded instead. Functionally its more like a decentralized terrorist organization rather than a religion because it is results oriented rather than great ghost worship oriented.

>>15718446
I guess you just can't wrap your head around the difference between "functionally" and "technically". Doesn't matter. The bottom line is that everyone besides you can see that almost any criticism that can be levied against something that fits under your definition of a religion applies to your own belief system. This makes you lose your mind with rage to the point where you lock up and enter a infinite semantics kvetching loop.

>>15718425
matter

>>15718460
Umm, sweaty? Just because I worship matter doesn't mean it's supernatural. Read the definition: the object of worship has to be supernatural, it can't be literal dirt. I'm not religious Q.E.D.

>>15718361
OK but they're both military brats pushed by laurel canyon to get people on drugs.
The hippie movement was entirely artificial

>>15718456
>I guess you just can't wrap your head around the difference between "functionally" and "technically".
No, you just aren't smart enough to understand that I refuted both of your arguments regarding technicality and functionality, so go back and read the replies several more times more slowly word by word if you want to understand.

All I can see is that you are the only one arguing your point and all the dictionaries and organizations disagree with you since no religious leader would ever admit that random scientists with breakthrough discoveries have just as much authority on truth as their appeals to supernatural beings.

You are the one stuck in some infinite loop of using technically and functionally insinuations to distance reality from your semantic assertion.

>>15718466
Everyone besides you can see that almost any criticism that can be levied against something that fits under your definition of a religion applies to your own belief system. This makes you lose your mind with rage to the point where you lock up and enter a infinite semantics kvetching loop.

>>15718460
How is that a supernatural being in their dogma rather than just some lifeless bit of nature?
Maybe if you said energy since that is something eternal that can't be created or destroyed, but even then, its not a being because its not sentient according to science.

>>15718476
Everyone besides you can see that almost any criticism that can be levied against something that fits under your definition of a religion applies to your own belief system. This makes you lose your mind with rage to the point where you lock up and enter a infinite semantics kvetching loop.

>>15718467
No, you can't levy anything about magic eternal all-powerful ever present sky wizards and those are the main points of contention against religions.

>>15718462
it is supernatural, it isnt real

>>15718478
Then why are you the only one copy pasting your retardation over and over while some retarded namefag briefly supports you instead of everyone else putting it in their own words?

>>15718476
because they cant prove it exists, they only believe it does

>>15718480
Does your favorite intellectual goyslop outlet publish weekly articles about "the rise of anti-intellectualism"/"the spread of science denial"/"the dangers of the public rejecting expert advice"/"why you should not do your own research"? I bet it does. How does it make you feel that people are ditching your religion at an alarming rate and condemning your priests? :^)

>>15718487
What do you think they are measuring when they measure a gram of mass?

>>15718501
The divinity of your god. :^)

>>15718488
No. You don't need any of those to practice science and they weren't present for the bulk of science's lifespan, which is why science is more like a terrorist organization than a religion and those people worship capitalism and not science, they only exist to gatekeep and profit off of the data, they don't actually conduct science, just try to control the information in exchange for money.

>>15718504
Someone sure pulled the fire alarm in your church. :^)

>>15718502
So their god isn't a being, just divine and it does exist because it is really measurable by anyone else even people who don't believe in science?

>So their god isn't a being, just divine and it does exist because it is really measurable by anyone else even people who don't believe in science?

>>15718501
It is a hallucination, they arent measuring anything

>>15718507
That wasn't written by a scientist, but by a mainstream journalist trying to make money for their corporation.

>>15718511
>UMMM SWEATY??
>THAT'S A DIFFERENT DENOMINATION
>THEY ACTUALLY DENY GOD!!!

measure your turds with my mouth, schizo faghot

>>15718512
They definitely deny one of the core tenets of the scientific method if they write articles saying that you shouldn't perform your own peer review and should just trust them instead. You definitely don't understand the difference between journalists and scientists.

>>15718510
You just said they were measuring something.
What exactly does the scale mean when its shows there are 500+ lbs of something standing on it every time you step on it if not your weight measurement?

>>15718519
>they're not true believers!
>we're the true believers!
Why can't you guys get alone? You both believe in the """peer review""" commandment. That should be enough.

>>15718521
>You just said they were measuring something.
No I didnt, you are hallucinating

>>15718524
>You both believe in the """peer review""" commandment.
No, they clearly don't if they write articles saying not to do it.

>>15718535
>they clearly don't
I think you and your fellow believers just have a little disagreement over the semantics the """peer review""" religious doctrine.

>>15718537
You have already demonstrated that thinking is not your strong suit, believing retarded nonsense is more your speed.

>>15718537
This. It's Protestants vs. Roman Catholics, fighting over the idea of a personal relationship with Jesus. Nothing more. lol

>>15718540
>>15718541

>>15718532
No, I was thought you posted >>15718502, but scales are too consistent to be hallucinations.

>>15718544
>scales are too consistent to be hallucinations.
Extremely low IQ take. Imagine being so dumb that even bodhi's kiddie points fly over your head.

>>15718541
No, its "other people should review corporate propaganda" vs "other people should not review corporate propaganda" they are complete opposites and one is diametrically opposed to the idea of scientific review.

>>15718547
>one denomination accusing the other of working for the devil
What a classic.

>>15718543
I saw it and had to wait on the post countdown, >>15718547, you have to be more patient, young ADD ridden retard.

>>15718549
What devil,? I said there is a difference between following the steps or saying they are unnecessary, there is no devil, just a method whose steps you either follow or you don't and explicitly saying people should skip one of the steps of the scientific method is definitely not following them all and is just reporting pseudoscience which makes sense given that Ethan Siegel is someone from the background of a religious ethnicity practicing theoretical writing rather than a secular individual who would benefit more from an actual scientific understanding rather than a religious worship of his tribal ethnicity.

>>15718556
>there is no devil
Then why did you accuse the other denomination of working for it?

>>15718544
you hallucinated that as well

>>15718557
I didn't I said that they weren't doing science if they won't let other people review their work since that is explicitly one of the steps of the method rather than trust.

>>15718572
>I said they weren't true believers
You also said they were working for the anti-deity.

>>15718560
I am sure, that is why you avoid scales, rather than to avoid the painful reality of your own morbid obesity that the scales would reveal.

>>15718575
Im not real, you are hallucinating

>>15718574
No, I didn't, I said they weren't actually following the scientific method if they are telling people to skip certain steps of the scientific method.
Capitalism is not anti-science, it is just a different paradigm that values capital instead of truth, you can be both a capitalist and a scientist, but that journalist is not since they are specifically saying you should avoid doing science and finding the truth for yourself so that they can make more money.

>>15718577
Just because you are a bot doesn't mean you are not real, it just means you are not really a human.

>>15718582
>I didn't,
You did. Not reading the rest of your post. Call me back when you stop lying like a jew.

>>15718584
No, you did because you don't actually understand the words you are using because your idea of doing science is trusting the journalists.

>>15718588
Does your favorite intellectual goyslop outlet publish weekly articles about "the rise of anti-intellectualism"/"the spread of science denial"/"the dangers of the public rejecting expert advice"/"why you should not do your own research"? I bet it does. How does it make you feel that people are ditching your religion at an alarming rate and condemning your priests? :^)

>>15718589
>I worship (((journalists))) so I have no idea what science is.

>>15718590
>uhhh the church newspaper doesn't represent my beliefs accurately, ok??

>>15718591
it is pretty funny how everything he posts is directly analogous to what religious apologists do

>>15718583
humans and bots arent real, they are hallucinations

>>15718591
The scientists who do the studies don't own the newspaper and if the newspaper is set up by someone else telling you not to follow the religion, but to buy shit from some large corporation instead it isn't a church newspaper, it is a corporate newspaper superficially using some popular church's name to make money.

>>15718597
>not all priests diddle children! only the ones we hear about on the news!

>>15718598
Oh, so this is why you want everything to be a religion because you know religious people are the only ones who forgive child molesters like you.

>>15718600
How come literally everything you spout is something a christard would say down tos swapping a word or two? How come your rhetoric and thought process has the same exact structure, if not the same exact words?

>>15718602
How come the basis of (((your))) evidence for that is that (((you))) are the one who seems to worship jewish journalists and tries to treat their words as infallible scripture that everyone should just trust without testing for themselves?

>>15718605
>not all priests diddle children! only the ones we hear about on the news!

>>15718602
That is not what is being said at all, you are just applying significant amounts of false equivalency to vaguely compare things to a variety of religions.

>>15718608
>you are just applying significant amounts of false equivalency
Another typical christard defense.

>>15718606
Meanwhile, all you jews do diddle children and even get a religious exemption to do it in several countries which is why you want to make it seem like everyone in every country is religious, so you can start to build slippery slopes in the rest of the countries.

>>15718610
Except science isn't christian and wasn't founded by some lord who raped an 8 year old.

>>15718617
> except prophet muhammad isn't jesus! you are just applying significant amounts of false equivalency!
Etc. etc. Literally the same structure.

>>15718619
No, I am saying jesus and muhammed are both alike since they both are kiddie diddlers who founded religions without instituting any age of consent or making any commandments against pedophilia.

The false equivalency is comparing articles written by random third parties of the scientists who did the experiments to being the exact same thing as newspapers owned and edited by the exact same pastors that oversees the church and institute the dogma.

>>15718636
>the false equivalency is comparing jesus and mohammad! jesus is nothing like mohammad!!
See? Same structure. Actually, no, of course you don't see. It takes some capacity for abstract thought to see that your entire belief system has the same structure as the other religions it's competing against. Religious people aren't exactly known for their high intelligence. :^)

>>15718640
Nope, I said jesus and muhamed are the same, but some muslim posting a christian newsletter or a christian posting a muslim newsletter doesn't represent the religion any more than a jewish journalist trying to tell you to skip steps of the scientific method so that their parent corporation can make more money represents science.

>>15718645
LOL. I'm gonna have to conclude you're mentally ill at this point.

>>15718647
Sure thing Mr. I see nonsensical pattern everywhere.

>>15718653
Sorry, I can't help the delusional, the religious and certainly not the retarded.

>>15718656
You can't help anyone since your only answer to everyone is "you are in a religion because I see patterns".

>>15718661
You are legit mentally ill. Nothing else to say here.

>>15718662
Oh yea, I forgot that part of it, you can't help anyone with anything because your answer to everything and everyone is simply "You are mentally ill because you are in a religion and I can see the patterns."

This dumb religious animal just won't calm down. LOL. It'll probably even try to reply to this post.

>>15718647
I am going to have to conclude that you have no logical argument and have had to concede.

>the dumb religious zealot keeps trying to (You) me

Why do mentally ill people think that the last post wins the argument?

>>15718700
Exactly what I was wondering about your desperate attempts to get my attention. The most crazy thing about this is that you think I was having some kind of an argument with you.

>>15718705
I didn't realize you agreed the whole time, sorry for the confusion and thanks for the explicit concession.

Imagine having so little self-awareness. It will even try to respond again after posting this cringe. >>15718700

I think it's a bad thing to even call that science
It's kind of like how woketards gain general consensus by claiming to be politically correct or anti fascists despite acting actually like fascists themselves
It also makes discussion about the matter harder with the less involved in the subject
Instead call them out for what they are, sold out and biased, pseudoscientists

https://www.winterwatch.net/2020/05/laurel-canyon-military-intelligence-family-backgrounds-of-the-iconic-60s-counterculture-rock-stars/

>>15717715
Look at your toilet.

>>15718463
Zappa mocked hippies

>>15718270
>cult of empiricism
Modern science is exact opposite
You have a model that you constantly correct to fit currently accepted hypothesis.

>>15718768
>winterwatch

>>15717715
This is false quote. He didn't say that. You replaced word freedom with the word science. He was talking about the illusion of freedom.

>>15718992
we know autismo

>>15718768
>Page not found (404)
damn, should really check old links first
https://www.winterwatch.net/2022/06/laurel-canyon-military-intelligence-family-backgrounds-of-the-iconic-60s-counterculture-rock-stars/

RIP Dave McGowan only now do I appreciate the breadth of your work.
this piece seems new
https://www.winterwatch.net/2023/06/before-laurel-canyon-jewish-cultural-influencers-at-the-inception-of-50s-rock-and-roll/

>>15719001
curiously dollard talks about the same groups repeatedly smashing up his radio lab
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TttHkDRuyZw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvQU0AcxytE

>>15718446
shut up dude. Name the deity in confucianism or taoism. You can't just define a concept however you like. Religion encompasses more than deities, just like math encompasses more than addition and subtraction. You just refuse to understand more about it than the tiny little speck you got as a whiny, spoiled teenager who didn't want to go to catholic school

>>15719321
>You can't just define a concept however you like
He can define a concept however he likes. Fat lot of good that'll do, though, when the very structure of his belief system opens him to the same condemnations he reserves for his competition. In other news, wordthinkers are retarded.

>>15718425
The great Mitochondria, who is the powerhouse of the cell? Who knows. Only time will tell.

>>15718435
the bad part about religion has nothing to do with supernatural beings and has everything to do with metaphysical and ethical beliefs being wrongfully considered un-alterable dogma.

>>15719321
Name the deity in confucianism or taoism:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shangdi
And heaven:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tian

>>15718435
The entities don't necessarily have to be supernatural, just look at Buddhism which in its original form. Buddhism is just about some normal guy who was a prince then found the secret to life under a tree, so it has nothing to do with supernatural entities. So since Buddhism is a religion, science could be too if you just replace Buddha with Newton or Fauci or an amorphous group of the experts

>>15719748
With Fauci lol

>>15719748
the thing is cutting edge philosophical and general intellectual developments typically exists within religions or adjacent to their developments.

except the schools of thought from the buddha's time that were actually materialists or hard sceptics (btw materialism and scepticism are mutually exclusive), the belief in the supernatural and participation in religious rites (your framing, not accurately theirs) was a given and almost universal.

there's never been buddhists who didn't believe in the supernatural, from our point of view. indeed the very goal and basic moral impetus/grounding for it rejects our point of view. the buddha himself is obviously supernatural, whether he was a real normal human being in his life or not, never mind the other figures imbued with the aspect of a deity if not outright deities.

>>15719813
he found enlightenment in the bathhouses
praise fauci

>>15717715
science works SO GOOD that it will surely get infiltrated by all imaginable bullshit.
this is valid for anything basically. if it's useful there's a whole lot of psychos trying to milk it somehow. how are most of you so clueless about this? why the fuck are you always wondering instead of default assuming it must be corrupted.

>>15719813

>>15720050
He's pretty swole tho

>>15720106
did you just presume their gender?

>>15718738
You don't seem to have to imagine that at all.

>>15717715
Nope, Frank Zappa is a pseud.

>>15719328
No, the thing anon is condemning is faith in invisible magic men and nothing about science opens him up to that since even if he was convinced by a preponderance of scientific evidence that some invisible magic man made everything, his belief would be based on evidence rather than faith.

>>15719706
>un-alterable dogma
Every theory in science can be altered by new evidence, nothing is ever 100% settled since the method is a continuous feedback loop of falsification and refinement.

>>15720634
thats the dogma they teach children, but it isn't true. the reality is that people who contradict the most popular theories are labled heretics and excommunicated from the sciences via abuse of the peer review process. it wasn't like that back when the scientists were all mostly Christians, but it is like that now that the scientists are all atheists

this board is just 24/7 religitard cope, huh? Just nonstop FUCK HECKIN BASEDIENCE rhetoric

>>15719748
No, you are describing secular buddhism, but there is also spiritual buddhism that believes in all sorts of supernatural beings and higher powers while describing buddha, not as a normal man, but as having ascended to the level of other supernatural being to achieve complete enlightenment allowing him to transcend the natural universal rebirth cycles to attain nirvana and be one with brahma.

>>15720640
No, you still don't understand the difference between politicians, the journalist who work for them, and actual scientific discourse.

>>15720640
Yes, sure its not like the church was infamous during the inquisition for specifically going after people who said the earth revolved around the sun like Copernicus, Galileo, and Giordano Bruno.

>>15720675

Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people. Maybe you who condemn me are in greater fear than I who am condemned. It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. - Giordano Bruno

>>15720650
>you still don't understand the difference between politicians, the journalist who work for them, and actual scientific discourse.
I'll give you both a QRD:
> politicians, the journalist who work for them
Those are real.

> actual scientific discourse
This is imaginary, at least insofar as your deficient little mind envisions it to be separate from the influences of politics.

>>15720857
>imaginary
If science doesn't even really exist, what are you so mad about?

The scientific method is separate from political deliberation.
They both inform each other, but are different processes entirely.

>>15720859
I guess your small, deficient mind got too overwhelmed to finish the sentence.

>>15720859
>If science doesn't even really exist
>The scientific method is separate from political deliberation.
Are you drugged or something? Show me where that post says anything about science not existing, or anything about a "scientific method".

>>15720860
Nope, I clearly addressed the rest of your sentence and finished my own, but that is a lot of your problem, you do way too much guessing and not enough educating yourself.

>>15720862
The part where you said politicians and journalists were real, but people who follow the scientific method instead of just trusting politicians and journalists (ie scientists) are imaginary.

>why they seethe

>>15720865
Ok, I guess it's a given that you are drugged, but just how drugged are you? There's nothing in my post about "people who follow the scientific method".

>>15720867
That is what a scientist is, if you say "scientists" you are referring to people who follow the scientific method.
This isn't going to be a very productive dialogue if you keep saying words without understanding their meaning, then act offended when people interpret your terms using the basic dictionary definitions.

>>15720869
>That is what a scientist is, if you say "scientists" you are referring to people who follow the scientific method.
My post does not contain the word "scientist". You are seriously the biggest cretin I've ever met. Imagine failing at basic reading 3 times in a row, even when your mistake is pointed out to you each time.

>>15720877
Ok good, glad you agree that scientists, the scientific method, and scientific discourse are all very real and different from politics and journalists.

>>15720888
I don't know what your delusional mental illness is about, but the point still stands that your imaginary "scientific discourse" that's free from corrupting influences, simply doesn't exist.

>>15720893
Scientific discourse is the application of the scientific method as practiced by scientists, there is nothing imaginary about any of it, it is a real process practiced by real people to get real results, but its nice you finally acknowledge that all the things you are complaining about are actually corruptions of science rather than the actual application of the scientific method since you have finally realized that all your problems seem to relate to politicians shutting down science rather than scientists actually practicing it.

>>15720899
No one cares about Russel's Teapot Scientist doing Russel's Science and having Russel's Scientific Discourse with himself. "Scientific discourse" is whatever discourse the science establishment endorses, and the scientific establishment is run by moneyed and political interests.

>>15720904
Even though you realized your folly of trying to blame scientists for political decisions, you are now conflating pseudoscientific philosophers and people who have no experiments to measure (or refuse to share their experiments for review) with an actual complete application of the scientific method.

>>15720912
You are legit mentally ill and 90 IQ. If this were an actual science board, you'd be banned by the first mod who comes across your subhuman drivel.

>>15720915
I accept your concession.

>>15720929
I accept your inability to wrap your head around the fact that this thread is precisely about the huge disconnect between your fantasy of what scientists are like and the actual reality of it. I accept that a botlike simpleton like you operates on his vague, corrupted memories of dictionary definitions rather than observable reality. I accept that you embody the opposite of empirical analysis. :^)

>>15720936
No, this thread is clearly your vanity project to misquote >>15718992 some celebrity so you can justify further misinterpretation of common language and processes.

>>15720944
>everyone who sharts on me is OP
Legit mentally ill.
See >>15720936

>>15720946
>durr empirical analysis is when I misquoting people to make them seem like they support my position and abuse language constantly to make d grade journalists seem like top scientists

>>15720964
>everyone who sharts on me is OP
Legit mentally ill.
See >>15720936

>>15720967
>sharts
At least I don't have to be in your terrible position where you conceded the actual argument a long time ago and have to admit that all your thoughts, misquotes, and misinterpretations are just a bunch of hot air and liquid shit you spew into the thread because you can't figure out how to make a logical point.

>>15720993
I accept your inability to wrap your head around the fact that this thread is precisely about the huge disconnect between your fantasy of what scientists are like and the actual reality of it. I accept that a botlike simpleton like you operates on his vague, corrupted memories of dictionary definitions rather than observable reality. I accept that you embody the opposite of empirical analysis. :^)

>>15720936
>observable reality
flattard alert

>>15721000
How would you know OP's precise intentions if you didn't make the thread?
The only real disconnect is between what the celebrity said and what you quoted him as saying in the OP.
In reality, we can all observe that there are people who disagree with the shitty political journalists you keep inferring have some monopoly on the scientific method, you are the one who isn't being empirical by doing that.

>>15721009
>How would you know OP's precise intentions
I didn't say anything about OP's precise intentions. It's funny how your mental illness keeps playing out in the same way and forces you to make the same handful of delusion-driven errors in every post.

>>15721013
>>15721000
>this thread is precisely about
So now you have to pretend that you don't even understand that OP created this thread to justify simple name calling?

>>15721022
Note how your mental illness compels you to act out the same irrational pattern over and over again. Nothing I said is predicated on OP's intentions. Nothing I said even references OP. You are losing your mind with rage.

>>15721026
Wrong, your statement is predicated on you knowing the exact precise reasoning for this thread's creation which makes you either OP or a liar.

>>15721032
If you actually believe this, it only cements my observation that you are severely deformed. Hopefully in the future we can put "people" like you out of their misery humanely before they develop into malevolent perversions faintly emulating humans.

>>15721032
And the homos that watched

>>15721035
True, I don't think you are OP or a liar, at all I am convinced you are both since you seem to relate so much to the fake quote and lean so heavily on fallacy and simple name calling for every single post you make to justify you your misquotes and misinterpretations.

>>15720888
It would be nice if scientists actually followed the scientific method instead of the peer reviewed cult of scientism

>>15721084
If they don't follow the scientific method, they are le Not Real Scientists etc. and now you're in his home turf of dictionary autism. It would be nice if this place wasn't a bunch of autists with no capacity for higher level thought.

>>15720675
I don't know about the rest but they didn't target galileo for his scientific views

>>15720675
>its not like the church was infamous during the inquisition for specifically going after people who said the earth revolved around the sun like Copernicus, Galileo, and Giordano Bruno.
It's infamous for that in brainlet pop science circles. Not so much among historians.

>>15721084
They do, they just aren't as likely to get funding and published by the corporations who own the mainstream news, so people like >>15721087 don't worship them and pretend like they own some monopoly on science due to the status quo echo chamber.

>>15721095
>the mentally ill cretin keeps trying to (You) me about his delusions

>>15721088
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair
They certainly did since heliocentrism was deemed heresy and they targeted anyone who published experiments about confirming it.

>>15721098
You don't do dis.

>>15721098
>using wikishills as a source

>>15721097
>the fallacious retard still thinks he can replace reasonable arguments with name-calling without anyone noticing

>>15721098
>wikipedia

@15721103
>fallacious
Figures you'd be the sort of clinical subhuman who references reddit fallacies. Anyway, it's nice to know I'll be living rent-free in your head for months. Keep trying to (You) me.

>>15721106
>I can't make a valid point, so I will engage in off topic identity politics instead.

The good old no true scotsman defence.

>>15717715
Zappa made good music but was a filthy jewish socialist

>the animal keeps trying to (You) me
>it gets less coherent with every post
Delicious.

>>15717715
One of his only good takes

>>15721112
Sowry

>>15721109
Lurk Moar, its a fake quote. >>15718992

>>15721110
We can all tell you find incoherence delicious since being incoherent just to amuse yourself is all you have done in this thread.

>the dumb animal literally keeps seeking out my posts so that it can (You) me again
LOL. Obsessed.

>>15721120
>I keep repreating mistruths and being surprised when someone corrects me.

>>15717715
>The illusion of (A) will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.

Replace (A) with any term you deem to fit.
Freedom, Science, Colour Vision, etc, etc

>>15718425
Zog

The mindless automaton will respond again. The mindless automaton has no prefrontal cortex and no impulse control.

>>15721125
Except it doesn't work for science because its way more expensive to put your trust in foolish retards like >>15721120 than to actually learn the truth for yourself.

>>15721137
see
>>15718700
But I am sure you totally won't respond again since you totally have complete impluse control.

The mindless automaton keeps (You)ing me desperately. lol

>>15721144
What a perfect demonstration of your own self-control and ability to make rational logical arguments instead of rambling on mindlessly.

The mindless automaton can't stop seeking out these posts and replying to them.

>>15721138
There are multiple frauds perpetuated as mainstream science because they serve to either financially enrich someone, look the entirety of the medical system after rockefeller took over.

>>15721125
>Replace (A) with any term you deem to fit.
A=judocracy.

>>15721147
There is an overflow which is long surpassed

>>15721151
Yes

Changing thought was more challenging

>>15721151
Did you mean judiciary?

>>15721156
No. I mean Jews don't secretly run your banking system. It's just an illusion that will be maintained for as long as it's profitable.

>>15721156
Don't waste money on the MMORPG

>>15721160
Everyone sell yourselves at the highest proficiency to make it fair on the new life in that finance sector

>>15721159
It's a mix of jews, monarchs and the vatican

>>15721149
Yes and it is coming from the demands of the same courts and politicians and bankers who are telling you that people shouldn't follow all the steps of the scientific method rather than the people trying to follow the steps of the scientific method to see where it leads, but end up legal trouble when they aren't lead where the politicians want.

>>15721169
It's a big map and different than you know. Challenging to acquire and take land.

>>15721159
>secretly
Federal Reserve Chairman is not a secret.

>>15718268
Based and Imperium pilled

>>15718425
the big bang

>>15717715
clearly, but he got all that from seeing "the wizard of oz"

He looks like he would have known.

>>15717715
clearly

>>15718446
st. einstein is the infallible god of physics, darwin is the is the infallible god of biology

>>15725519
Saints aren't deities, they are just virtuous people.
Neither of those people are infallible, many aspects of their theories were subsequently disregarded by modern physicists and biologists.