they do.

lol

what is the omphalos hypothesis aqua?

I'd jump into this convo but something literally just popped up

>As in, created to look older than it was.

oh

like, why would you expect anyone to take you seriouslywhen you say shit like this

its not *mainstream* to dispute it

but it isn't crackpot

either

@ghj That the world may have been created much more recently than empirical evidence suggests, because that evidence's origin is unknown. It may have been artificed.

but romans have records banjod

they wrote about his trial

lol

no roman records of a Jesus exist

EVERYWHERE I GO
I MUST LOL

It implies the unreality of the past, as thanks to the problem of induction, we can't actually peer back in time.

but do you know occam's razor @Aqua

the simplest explanation is often the correct one

Occam's Razor is a probabilistic tool.

not always but often

It's not definitive.

someone explain why banjod experiences salt from christians when he shows them they are stupid, can't think, are christ cucks, and deserve ridicule and being laughed at. He's very puzzled and needs an answer. PLEASE HELP!

Being probably correct is not qualitatively better than being wrong.

Christians using Last Tuesdayism to excuse faulty history

<:steflol:561214382181318656>

It is only marginally better for lack of the option to actually be correct.

<:pepekek:649611550809653248>

Basically, likelihood is like varying degrees of being wrong.

for sure

aqua

Always inferior to certainty.

but it's a probability

there's more probability

that the earth is very old

than not

simple as

science is never absolute

Yes. But because the possibility remains always open that it isn't the case, Occam's Razor is just a tool of convenience.

Not one of accuracy.