Message from @Morning Dew
Discord ID: 608149732493230081
im actually really sad now imma go watch some youtube or something idk
@Seeker of Truth#3628
that's an F
well i guess im off for the night
I’m fighting the final boss in Sekiro
Help
@Drewski4343 those records were planted, along with hieroglyphs. “established science and observation” is a pseudo-authoritative way of saying “theoretical concept” because you did not do any measurements or experiments, you base star distances on theoretical color spectrums and trigonometry involving unproven distance between the earth and sun, which is established by another theoretical equation that is not experimentation or true measurement. Dont try to talk down to me with your Phoenician lies you waltz around with like they’re facts, your entire conception of history is a nonsense lie
is there any skeletal proof of giants? off topic just wonder
You do the same thing, telling us "stars should whizz around the sky." That's based on nothing.
The hieroglyphs were planted...? Well, that's a new one for me.
damn
@Drewski4343 its obvious when you think about it. napoleon just waltzes in and finds the most important discovery in history? and its not found in the pyramids or any other significant artifacts? how interesting
burden of proof is on the man walking around like his theories are facts and talking down with muh science appeal to authority fallacies
i'll look into that later
Burden of proof, I'm afraid, lies on anyone trying to turn over established science.
That's a big bone
what is te story behind that pic?
liek some private guy dug it up?
Let’s stop generalizing with a condescending tone, i realize you were brainwashed to behave that way so I forgive you
As soon as you have a working theory, Dew, I'll be happy to weigh the two and come to a conclusion.
I wasn't trying to be condescending, I do apologize if it came off as such. I enjoy a good debate.
@*ᶜʳᵒⁿᶜʰ* the most convincing evidence is the architecture they destroyed which was obviously made for giants. check this channel out: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnK3gIeVugsW_MzkG82pcUQ
sure
@Drewski4343 thats not how logic works.
??
i don’t need a theory to prove that your theory isn’t facts. thats a fallacy
You haven't proven my theory to be false. You appealed to a conspiracy.
words like “established” are meaningless. it was “established” that we went to the moon and thats nonsense too
i have proven your theory to be a theory, which you waltz around with like its a fact
with your buzzwords like “established science”
^
i can smell the appeals to authority and condescending establishment snobbery before he even makes the post
I am appealing to established science because that is what I am trusting as a source. When this discussion started, I was being told that the current standard of heliocentrism was proven false by its own view of the stars. I stated that, according to this standard, the view is correct, to which I was suddenly barraged with a switched flat earth viewpoint.
muh established science, muh everything that contradicts the mainstream narrative is a “conspiracy theory”
your language is fallacious by default, you hold modern theories to the standard of facts, even though they change constantly, and your very language is designed to condescend to competing theories
So, it makes sense for me to argue with viewpoint of established science.
I believe you mentioned you didn't want to be condescending.
“established science” keep saying this like it means anything
its how snobs talk down whilst defending their narratives. you and your “facts”
Established science is something. I know it makes you angry, but it does mean something. Established science built the computer/phone you're talking to me with right now.