The scientific method is not flawed, just limited*

ecplain

explain*

great for explaining natural phenomenon

Come back in vc @Deleted User

and finding ways to predict how things will respond

but cannot be used directly to determine... say... historical events

if you unmute my boy <@409863297974927360> and stop having an orgasm over ur moderator role muting people everytime

it can verify certain facts

but it cannot say for certain that George Washington was the first president

what?

how does that relate to how the scientific method is flawed

you ignored the question

never said it was flawed

just limited

explainb

again

you havent explained

great for science

just gave some random "example

exactly

but it only works for science

thats why its called the scientific method

right

it proves facts

I agree with you

certain facts*

facts based on repeatability

ok guys arguing with a genius is hard, arguing with an imbecile is impossible

@Deleted User what did I say?

join vc

I can't talk rn... but can listen

ok well then no point in vc

I was just covering bases

before @California Nightmare 3.0 starts asking about metaphysics

do literally any of you guys have any sort of education or qualification?

like anyone

Me, yes

based on astrology or physics or engineering

in what

astronomy*