Sybil isn't a moron. In fact, I think he has average intelligence or higher. OTOH, he's clearly batshit crazy so his view of reality is often distorted.
Assumptions
- Thread starter IBDaMann
- Start date
Sybil isn't a moron. In fact, I think he has average intelligence or higher. OTOH, he's clearly batshit crazy so his view of reality is often distorted.
Into the Night
Verified User
A theory is not a hypothesis. A hypothesis stems from an existing theory.
It is not possible to prove any theory True. Transcribing a theory into a closed functional system like mathematics creates an equation, known as a scientific 'law'. If the theory is falsified, the 'law' goes with it.
You discard theories of science, including the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law. You claim your religion as 'science'.
You deny and discard mathematics too. You make up random numbers and call it 'data'. You attempt to claim a statistical summary through a series of egregious math errors.
You have no data. Claiming that you do does not make it data.
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
Got that backwards, bucko.
But that's to be expected: you are a science illiterate.
LOLOL. Geez you are so uneducated in all this stuff. It's got to be embarrassing to you to be so wrong so much of the time. What a buffoon.
Into the Night
Verified User
You are just describing yourself.
A hypothesis stems from a theory. An example is the null hypothesis of a theory.
A theory is an explanatory argument.
An argument is a set of predicates and a conclusion.
It is not possible to prove any theory True.
Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Non-falsifiable theories are not theories of science. They remain circular arguments, and if arguments extend from them, they become religions. Only religions use supporting evidence. Science does not.
The Church of the Big Bang is a religion.
The Church of the Continuum is a religion.
The Church of Creation is a religion.
The Church of Abiogenesis is a religion.
The Church of Evolution is a religion.
The Theory of Natural Selection has been falsified due to an internal consistency problem and due to exceptions found.
The Church of the Ozone Hole is a religion.
The Church of Green is a religion.
The Church of Global Warming is a religion.
The Church of Covid is a religion.
The Church of Perversion is a religion.
The Church of No God is a religion.
The Church of Karl Marx is a religion.
Science has no theories about past unobserved events. They are not falsifiable.
Science does not use proxy 'data'. Such 'data' is not raw data. It is contrived.
Science does not use cooked 'data'. Such 'data' is not raw data. It is contrived.
No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. There is nothing special about carbon dioxide, methane, water vapor, nitrogen gas, etc.
You cannot create energy out of nothing. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics.
You cannot heat a warmer surface using a colder gas. You are ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
You cannot trap heat. You are ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
You cannot trap light. You are ignoring Planck's law and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
You cannot trap thermal energy. There is always heat.
You cannot compare two systems as the same system. That's a false equivalence fallacy.
You cannot use anything but unbiased raw data in statistical math. That data MUST be published, the variance justified and declared, and selection from the dataset MUST be by randN. The selected data MUST be normalized by paired randR. The margin of error value MUST be calculated and MUST accompany the summary.
You deny science.
You deny mathematics.
You deny logic.
You deny philosophy.
Redefinition fallacies.
Omniscience fallacy.
Circular argument fallacies (fundamentalism).
Last edited:
Threeve. That's the answer. Threeve.
You assumed APL meant the Sun. Another of your many mistakes, including thanking yourself with your socks.
What if the star in question is Vega?
You are literally the first person in the history of the internet to call Hubble's Law a religion
Yakuda
Verified User
Science is your religion. Climate deniers are anathema. What's interesting is your whole tranny dogma isnt based on science in the least just like your approach to the covid plandemic.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Can I be the second?
When people such as yourself take a speculative line of reasoning, e.g. Hubble's law (which should be called Hubble's Conjecture) and then preach it as thettled thienth, they have converted an idea into worshiped dogma.
This is exactly what you have done. Religion you have.
that has nothing to do with what you asked me.
You asked me to explain why I thought hydrogen was createded 13 billion years ago, and what the age of the Big Bang was based on.
I gave you detailed answers to your questions. You just didn't like the answers and decided to pout.
Science is not a religion. NASA didn't put mankind on the Moon with prayer. The medical needles and drugs used by drug addicts were not religious items; they are tools created by science.
Irrational people say wacky things.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
I wouldn't use that wording wrt Cypress. It's not science he worships. He worships the pre-packaged speculations of others that alleviate him from having to think. He simply declares speculation as sacred truth, gives himself a warm-fuzzy assurance that he must be correct, and then he mocks those who do not worship as he does.
I am an atheist; I therefore don't worship any speculative dogma. I have only science, math, logic, direct observation and economics models (when appropriate) as tools for discussion. Cypress discards any science that requires him to think and substitutes it for his prepackaged dogma.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
People who have never recovered from their drug-binging "spiritual journies" say WACKY things.
Yakuda
Verified User
I didn't say science is a religion i said it's his religion.
I was never on a "drug-binging" spiritual journey, Sybil. Tell me all about yours. Was it mostly lithium?
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Correct. NASA didn't put anyone on the moon because NASA can't do that any more than HUD can.
Rockwell and Grumman successfully put Armstrong and Aldrich on the moon. NASA successfully managed some contracts.
You say the WACKIEST things. It's like you're still on your "spiritual journey" or something. Technology is built by engineers. Science has never created anything except maybe some new ideas.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Is it redundant to say both "drug-binging" *and* "spiritual journey"?
IBDaMann
Well-known member
I never claimed that you said otherwise. I said that I wouldn't use that wording, for the reasons I delineated.
Monad Portal
Was it me?
yes. fascism.