Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 341015495794753548
@National Trotskyist you know what else I find hilarious is that ethnonationalism was one of the primary platforms of the Soviet system
@Mimic King#0692 I never said that a lack of evidence was the same as being disprovable, at all. Falsifiable means that a discovery can be made that makes a hypothesis untenable, like my example shows clearly.
I find it hilarious because both holocaust revisionism and ethnonationalism are considered FASCIST NAZISM by the nu-left but are really classically leftist positions
@Deleted User one is based on another. It is a specific relation. It is just different areas. Logic is more abstract theory. But is united with less.
but you're wrong @Deleted User
a lack of evidence is never what shows that a hypothesis is untenable
@Firefly#9983 Okay, thanks for the correction. Maybe I should just focus on materialism first.
I don't see that in his post as all.
What he said hasn't got anything to do with a lack of evidence 😒
@Mimic King#0692
>a lack of evidence is never what shows that a hypothesis is untenable
I agree with you! How am I not clear?
for a hypothesis to be falsifiable, there must be a condition whereby evidence to support the claim CAN be discovered
So saying that "lack of fossils" would falsify evolution and natural selection is completely nonsensical
"Falsifiable means that a discovery can be made that makes a hypothesis untenable"
That's what I said numbnuts.
Right, meaning, contravening evidence, not a LACK of evidence
EXACTLY
a lack of evidence just means the hypothesis is unproven
🤔
it doesn't mean the hypothesis is unfalsifiable
so, you're confused
No, you are confused.
Your script broke.
GG.
Haha
mutations, whatever
@Deleted User materialism is not very agile. It needs dialectics to function properly. Many materialist are less agile than even some idealists.
it's not a lack of mutations what would falsify evolution
you're still wrong in either case
because you don't actually understand falsifiability yet
I know, but if mutations where show to not occur, this was discovered, it would falsify evolution.
again, you're completely confused on falsifiability
what you're saying is that a lack of mutations would leave the theory of evolution UNSUBSTANTIATED
@Firefly#9983 Hmm, I will have to think of a good way to communicate historical and dialectical materialism is a single way. Or not! When I feel like it.
that doesn't mean it would be unfalsifiable or falsifiable based on a lack of mutations
I don't think you understand evolution, then.
I understand it just fine, you just don't understand what falsifiability is
@Deleted User is hard man.
Sorry, I'm a retard, Marx is a retard, the holocaust never happened, and I want to stroke your penis.
For the evolutionary hypothesis to be falsifiable, there must exist a plausible observable condition that would prove it's existtence, which it has, thereofre the hypothesis is falsifiable
even if no evidence were found, it would simply show the hypothesis was unfounded, not that it was unfalsifiable