Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisFromChicago
what leads you to this conclusion?
Ad Hominimum attacks on other people doesn't prove you right or wrong.
You don't know my education level, the people in my network, or my ability to understand relevant scientific data.
Based on my review, and the support, I see no widespread disagreement in the scientific community regarding these facts.
People who blast theories, don't understand. . its like seeing a huge number of signs , roads, weather patterns, etc all pointing in the same direction. All giving you the same data. Independently and uniquely verifiable and all tests only seek to confirm the hypothesis
I'm up . . .for your theory. If all signs point to this event . . what is your theory that competes? One that fills in all the same gaps as this theory does, but just happens to be different
i'm waiting
How about a Giant being in another dimension ejaculation that is . . .
|
Since you know your fallacies...
Argumentum ad populum
Burden of proof of your babbling is ON YOU...don't just throw big numbers and reference bodies of work and then conclude it to be true with ambiguous statements like "You don't know my level of education"
You don't see any widespread view? Tell me, Newton...where do you look for a "widespread view"?? How do YOU determine if something is "widespread"?? Especially within the scientific community.
I am discussing one thing here and one thing only....
The findings from BICEP2 and how the medias emotional reports were hasty conclusions designed to shape peoples perception.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
