/sci/ - Science & Math

vaginas aren't possible because OP hasn't seen any

>>4828837
Shit, that actually makes sense.

What if vaginas don't exist? I mean I haven't seen any evidence so far.

>>4828840
Vaginas are a requirement for birth.
Your argument is invalid.

>>4828848
that's what they tell us. amirite?

>>4828848
That's what they want you to believe. But can you prove it?

Waiting for OP to prove the existence of vaginas he can't

>>4828848
I haven't seen birth either.

>>4828848
>C-section
Your move

>time travel isn't possible because no mechanism allowing time travel exists that doesn't violate physical principles.

--> vaginas don't exist because every providable evidence of vaginas can be disproven or dismissed.

frankly i'm surprised the government is keeping all the vaginas for themselves and isn't selling them out to people with money.

Vaginas exist because I can scientifically prove they exist.

1. If time travel existed, we would have seen time travelers from the future

2. We have not seen any time travelers

3. Therefore, time travel does not exist

>>4828892
You can only travel forward in time.

Duh.

How do we know we haven't seen any time travelers before?

>>4828886
>implying some mechanism exists that will allow me to see a girl's vagina

>God isn't real simply because we haven't seen God.

I agree OP, this is a terrible argument.

>>4828892
1 is incorrect

Time travel makes you invisible

>>4828892
That implies we have the technology capable of achieving time travel. It doesn't mean that time travel isn't physically possible.

Big silver time travellers

>>4828886

The oil companies are suppressing vaginas for their own profit.

>>4828903
Careful! There are Atheists EVERYWHERE. They're like ravenous animals!

>>4828895
You are worse than Christians who posit the existence of God. They can't prove the existence of God and no you can't prove the existence of vaginas either

>>4828926
Oh, but I can. I can physically see and feel a vagina; I cannot physically see or feel a "God".

>>4828931
>I can physically see and feel
You are delusional and hallucinating. Come on, try to post evidence. I could need a good laugh.

Hipothesys: We live in a version of the present where Time-travelers haven't gone to yet.
As in if a time-raveler came into our specific universe it would change the now not being the dimension he was aiming for but one slightly different making the version of history that leads to now obsolete since it has taken a new path

>>4828931
There are countless reports of people coming in direct contact with God. How are your claims of being able to touch a vagina any different ?

>>4828931
I hate to break it to you but your imagination does not count as "scientific proof".

The retards in this thread are the soul reason i Reddit.
>the reasons no one cares about 4chan anymore.

>yfw the troll face was modeled after hawking

I prefer the hitchhikers guide rational, that time fits together like a puzzle so you can't change the past, and no one believes you're from the future, because that's crazy and so are you.

>>4828954
>dislikes retards
>goes on reddit

>>4828954
>no one cares about 4chan

despite the amount of evidence pointing to the contrary? why are you even on this board?

>>4828955
>the troll face was modeled after hawking

>>4828892
You mean from the past?

>>4828827
> That's the shittiest argument I've ever heard.

What, evidence? So evidence is the shittiest argument you've ever heard?

Time travel into the past is obviously impossible. After all, once time travel become possible, then time travelers would have deluged the past. Instead there's nothing.

It's logically sound and that makes you BUTTHURT.

One of the big problems with Western thought is that it's rejected (as a maxim, hence it's ideology and not actual THINKING) the idea that the absence of evidence is evidence of absence. There are many situations in which it's the evidence of absence. Can you find any5-ton elephants in your house? No? Then the absence of such evidence is OBVIOUSLY evidence of their absence.

People who don't accept what the absence of evidence says about existence, are just ideologists, being about as bad as and Christian or Muslim with their provably wrong ideas about a Giant Sky Father. Not accepting evidence of absence, is just a RELIGION.

>>4828827
Let's suppose that you can travel through time.
The time machine you make you travel four years back, but you would go back and stay in that point of space. That point of space that you are right now is somewhere in the universe, and earth would take 4 years to get there. And you would explode.

>>4828973

>Dat filename

Time travel isn't falsifiable. Get out

>>4828997
Fuck off, RedCream.

>>4828997
>One of the big problems with Western thought is that it's rejected (as a maxim, hence it's ideology and not actual THINKING) the idea that the absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

PEOPLE CAN'T INTO CONDITIONAL PROBABILITY