>>9195872
I learn what so many writers and thinkers look like just cause all of the people who post threads with nothing but a picture of the writer to go on.

Belief is for religious fags

>>9195948
The scientific method's just as bad. Stupid sci-bots and their obsession with an antiquated Roman legal form, of which, of course, they know precisely nothing. What! Is the Earth on trial?

File: 550E2715-45F2-47C0-838C-7E96EE979C66-2282-000002EC08EB8F29_tmp.jpg (37KB, 424x550px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 424x550px

>>9195872
Wut

>>9196562
>tfw you try to bait but too stupid to even simulate having an argument
Sort yourself out. Have some sage and a report meanwhile.

>>9195948
As well as their imbecile doctrine of 'not falsifiable' which is itself 'not falsifiable,' but too easy to deconstruct. Otherwise, I confess a weakness for Popper. I mean he WAS Gombrich's friend, and so heartbreakingly earnest!

>>9196571
Wrong. It's true, and not my thread.. To go into detail wd be to dispense content... But, as a surmise. it's not so difficult.. Why not investigate it for yourself?

>>9196571
Here's a clue: consider 'evidence' -- where does its very notion originate, including that of it's application? If I had you here for argument you would lose. Very badly.

>>9196614
Can you expand on that?

File: Galilei.jpg (72KB, 470x399px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 470x399px

Watch out, OP, I heard you...