Message from @AltHarrington
Discord ID: 593253354679828501
this discussion of semantics is a deflection from the things you have no answer for, and the theories you have not proven
The theory of evolution
<@330401359507619840>
lol, encyclopedia britannica is proof
Loool
You going to pick NASA's definition
Man i just came here to argue about vaccines, i know more about that than this đ
Or the original theory of gravity
Ignore them for a minute, Alt. Let me tell you how to prove something.
Vaccines are gud
the basis for you entire model of the universe has not been proven through the scientific method, which is extremely ironic.
The scientific method.
You still haven't picked
Is taught one of two ways.
Nasa definition
Or regular definition
The first is the google definition.
Observation, hypothesis, measurement, and experiment.
The second.
so jack, do you just regurgitate the words of others, or do you speak the language of English? just curious
No they changed the definition entirely
First definition DELETES force
Second one adds a force
not really. The non-nasa definition goes more in-depth
The second, is simply observation, measurement, and experiment.
The earth is clearly flat if it was round how did nasa take this picture
No it literally says NO FORCE
You donât actually need to hypothesize shit.
See no force
you cannot prove the concept of orbits through experimentation. your bickering over semantics is a pointless deflection. @Mystery NASA had absolutely no real pictures of earth. what you think are âpicturesâ are CGI images
The blue marble is a very artificial image in any case
Oh, the meme army is here too?? Yeah, composite is a real thing
and it does not make them fake
@AltHarrington so again
You can if you want after, but at any rate, whatâs important is that youâre able to make an observation, measure the observation, and experiment with it.
Which one
composites can be easily faked. you could use them to make a flat or globe model. it proves nothing