By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
0D0 said:
SpokenTruth said:

No, I'm arguing against using older scientific models to suggest that modern models are wrong.  The fact you don't understand that is telling.  It means you don't want a scientific truth, just whatever truth you want.

hahaha, I don't want scientific truth. hohoho how monkey I am, right?

Yesterday's scientific model is old today.

Today's scientific model will be old tomorrow.

There are exemples of science of yesterday that is wrong today.

Science of today might be wrong tomorrow.

In 10 years, I'll be here on this topic pointing out that this piece of news didn't materialize. And you will be here saying that I'm talking about old scientific models and journalistic manipulation. That's because YOU, my dear, just want whatever truth you want. :D :D :D :D

The Church argued heliocentrism was wrong. Some people have argued there's no climate change or coronavirus, or whatever, because the science was incomplete. These people were later proven wrong. Therefore, the Church and other science skeptics are always wrong. See how your fallacious argument goes?

Like other people, you can be more likely to accept evidence that supports your beliefs and more likely to scrutinize findings that do not. You can argue that applies to that Australian scients or whoever you want, but not that it doesn't to you. That's naïve cynicism to right there.