I'm still waiting for you to explain Euler's formula... but since you can't - you've demonstrated you are grasping at straws to validate a pov that is far outside the boundaries of the way science is done.
I'm surely not versed in all areas of science and philosophy, but I am definitely not ignorant about them.
I would suggest you read the statement from the National Academy of Sciences about what constitutes a scientific theory and is considered ESSENTIAL CRITERIA for any scientific theory.
you spout half-baked bullshit here all the time and pretend you know something about science - but it seems pretty obvious that you don't.
so, why should I care that someone like you says I am ignorant about science and philosophy when you have never demonstrated any understanding of the basic premises behind science?
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
