Message from @「阿波根うみこ」
Discord ID: 575049966620246019
Oh yes, absolutely. Most people have absolutely no clue what those proposed ideas actually entail
And so a lot of people come to some really weird conclusions sometimes
scientific conclusions seem to be ignored cause their isnt empirical evidence to back them up
did u read the article i posted
That's why there are things like flat Earthers and anti-vaxxers, because things get omitted and dumbed down to the point where it's easy to ignore it and come to your own conclusions
Thats nowhere near true
Scientific conclusions are accepted by the scientific community, but the laymen only accept the dumbed down versions of it.
Born out of a cosmic explosion 13.8 billion years ago, the universe rapidly inflated and then cooled, it is still expanding at an increasing rate and mostly made up of unknown dark matter and dark energy ... right?
This well-known story is usually taken as a self-evident scientific fact, despite the relative lack of empirical evidence—and despite a steady crop of discrepancies arising with observations of the distant universe.
thats the first paragraph
scientific america
It's hard to understand complex things, that's why they're complex
Theres no scientific evidence to cover things like flat earth, governmentally spread messages are backed up
Which turns people away
That entire article is a perfect example
There is not a single model that answers all the criteria the globe does that a flat earther can produce
It's written by a troglodyte who knows nothing about cosmology.
No *single* model will answer all that
that s scientific america
Just by the usage of certain words
I don't care what it is.
<:CHECK6:403540120181145611> @Payo502 has been warned
```
reason: Bad word usage
```
Who publishes what doesn't matter.
What matters is what the article says.
And it's a bunch of baloney.
eh idk
Jeremy youre suggesting science is false because theres no science behind it
im just showingu guys the article
And we're telling you the article is garbage.
And whoever wrote it deserves a smack on the head.
The obviously uneducstional and inaccurate artical proves our point
Scientific American (informally abbreviated SciAm or sometimes SA) is an American popular science magazine. Many famous scientists, including Albert Einstein, have contributed articles to it. It is the oldest continuously published monthly magazine in the United States (though it only became monthly in 1921).
sounds prestigious
>pop-science magazine
Which is exactly the dumbed down garbage we mentioned
I only trust true scientists
Like bill nye
Just because some of the people who write/wrote articles for it are famous or writing in good faith, doesn't mean all are
Just like just because it is Einstein writing an article doesn't mean it should be taken as fact off the bat
People make mistakes, sometimes deliberately, so you have to ensure all of the content is correct