Reply With Quote
I would like to see Science create life with hydrogen and helium after getting it to explode.
Snapple wipple, transmablamma flognort.
I would like to see Science create life with hydrogen and helium after getting it to explode.
I'd like to see humans appear out of nowhere
At what point do some of you figure out I'm never ever going to buy we came from fish?
Thats just the membrane. That's the easy part.
Ok caveman
checkmate
Why act like I'm alone with this? Billions and billions of us don't buy that silliness.
Science was wrong before
So were you.
About several things.
You may now begin your meltdown.
actually, from what I understand it is the hard part. you have to have the membrane for anything else to function, to what I understand. Again, fascinating research.
Rejected.Fallacy: Appeal to Popularity
Also Known as: Ad Populum
Description of Appeal to Popularity
The Appeal to Popularity has the following form:
Most people approve of X (have favorable emotions towards X).
Therefore X is true.
The basic idea is that a claim is accepted as being true simply because most people are favorably inclined towards the claim. More formally, the fact that most people have favorable emotions associated with the claim is subs uted in place of actual evidence for the claim. A person falls prey to this fallacy if he accepts a claim as being true simply because most other people approve of the claim.
Flopple wag ro magrrum.
At what point will you start answering questions honestly?
Doesn't the trolling get old? It is like watching a teenager play with toys for an infant.
And it will be wrong again or need a better model again, I am sure of it.
The Earth is still thought to be round, and populations of organisms change over time.
They both hold solid. Just because you don't like or understand these current models does not invalidate them.
You are totally in over your head Blues Brother.
Go memorize a list, thinking is not something you do well.
https://www.britannica.com/list/7-ve...the-human-body
#6
Asked for, and given.
Avante seems to enjoy being wrong about this.
Science was wrong before
Thinking for yourself is so hard, it requires, like reading and stuff.
Mouse walks into a sinkhole again.
Hey mouse man, did you know some people are actually born with tails and have them snipped off? I betcha didn't. Just like you never heard of chicken born with teeth. I guess it was a miracle to upset you.
Then it gets more right.
That's why science is.
You were wrong before and you stay wrong, just more loudly wrong.
Science gets things wrong, has done, and will do.Fallacy: Ad Hominem
Description of Ad Hominem
Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her cir stances, or her actions is made (or the character, cir stances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:
Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on person A.
Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, cir stances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).
Problem is that the attack "science was wrong before" has no bearing on whether it is right about this.
More infantile fail.
Science is wonderfully self-correcting in that.
If you have the time, you should watch that. Wonderfully put together, simple, well-paced, and hits all the major points.
It talks about the self-correcting aspect of science, as does the "burden of proof" video that I post from the same channel.
Babies with tails is #6 in the britannica entry.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
