and are instead part of the proven fraudulent narrative that goes directly against (or is otherwise not supported by) what little science and data that we do have.
Then technically, all narratives are currently fraudulent, even the ones spread on here.
The article is crap in general though, I definitely agree with you on that.
Then technically, all narratives are currently fraudulent, even the ones spread on here.
Not exactly. There are expositions of the data and other science that are not fraudulent, even if they are not correct, or not complete. Fraudulent means not based on any actual science or based on science with proven false axioms.
This is an incredibly important distinction to take note of when doing research.
Then technically, all narratives are currently fraudulent, even the ones spread on here.
The article is crap in general though, I definitely agree with you on that.
Not exactly. There are expositions of the data and other science that are not fraudulent, even if they are not correct, or not complete. Fraudulent means not based on any actual science or based on science with proven false axioms.
This is an incredibly important distinction to take note of when doing research.