Why are some scientists' claims valid and others not?

@vazorium no. I'm saying optics is verifiable. Space is not.

Gtg for a bit.

@Citizen Z Right, so we can trust medical science now? Are *you* going to tell *me* that vaccines don't cause autism like medical science says?

This form of reasoning is extremely ad-hoc.

@vazorium I never claimed vaccines cause autism. However it's possible there is a correlation.

@Citizen Z Medical science says vaccines definitely do not cause autism. Again, ad-hoc reasoning.

The onset of symptoms of autism is around the same time vaccines are given. That's all

Autism is from birth

@vazorium ok. Your opinion based off a belief. See how that works...

It's like trying to say going to hospitals makes you sick

You didn't go to the hospital and then got sick. You were sick prior to going

@Citizen Z my "opinion" on the matter of the shape of the Earth is based on facts as stated by experts, something you are willing to do, blindly, for the anomy of the eye. if the former can be dismissed because of allegations of conspiracy, why is there no suspicion of conspiracy when it comes to human anatomy?

@vazorium appeal to authority

Not an argument

There's definitely medical conspiracies but this ain't one

@Citizen Z Appeal to authority is a valid argument, and something you will use in regards to the anatomy of the eye. Also, prove Appeal to Authority is a fallacy.

😂

Seriously gtg now. Look it up.

@Citizen Z Emojis aren't arguments. Where did you learn appeal to authority is a fallacy?

Further, if appeal to authority is a fallacy, then you can't claim to know facts about the eye.

😂

Appeal to authority is when you assume that just because someone is an authority they're right

Alright, @April has been warned for '**Bad word usage**'.

Authorities can be wrong. That's the whole point of conspiracy theories

@April at 7:36 PM
*"Appeal to authority is when you assume that just because someone is an authority they're right"*
And? Citing facts as discovered by the experts is not a fallacy.

By default, there's no reason *not to* assume a given authority of a subject matter is wrong about said subject matter. You'd have to prove the authority is wrong.

And saying "Oh they're paid by the government." isn't proof of this.

Now, if the authority is *invalid*, say taking a layman's opinion and using it as a source, I would agree that's a fallacious argument.

I can't post pictures. But at 1000 feet altitude, on a flat earth, we could see about 542.5 miles given our angular resolution, while on the globe, the curvature would stop it at 38.7 miles.
Flat earth simply doesn't match reality.

😂

https://youtu.be/__liPsAYnJs

😂

And you can see the bottom obscured by that curvature

Longer distances could be seen due to refractive circumstances

https://youtu.be/KxLwaaU1aNk

<:globiegoggles:485140915149864980>

April. You need a wake up call... hospitals are one of the WORST PLACES for catching viruses or worse... even though they help you get well. ITS WHERE SICK PEOPLE GO WITH THIER DISEASE AND VIRUS.. i worked for 6 years in ICU and Cardio care units.. Mersa and worse is there

Autism 30 years ago was a 5-6 in a 100 maybe.... today its like over 30 %.. you tell me whats changed... ill tell you.. The MANDATORY VACCINE PROGRAMS

Perhaps not the best analogy but you get my point