Reply to Commie_EntSniper (kek) on reddit

What he said: "Nah, it's a "critique" of "the infaliability" of science, conveniently overlooking the fact that science is a recursive examination and elimination of possibilities, not a declaration of absolutism. The fact that science changes is proof that it works."

My response: exactly right on my argument at least you got that right, the part where you are wrong is suggesting that right now the "experts" could be just as wrong as the "experts" of Galileo's years I'm not anti science I'm anti dogma and the bastardization of science, science requires an open mind

Reply to Commie_EntSniper (kek) on reddit

What he said: "Nah, it's a "critique" of "the infaliability" of science, conveniently overlooking the fact that science is a recursive examination and elimination of possibilities, not a declaration of absolutism. The fact that science changes is proof that it works."

My response: exactly! at least you got my argument right, the part where you are wrong is suggesting that right now the "experts" could be just as wrong as the "experts" of Galileo's years

Reply to

What he said: "Nah, it's a "critique" of "the infaliability" of science, conveniently overlooking the fact that science is a recursive examination and elimination of possibilities, not a declaration of absolutism. The fact that science changes is proof that it works."

My response: exactly! at least you got my argument right, the part where you are wrong is suggesting that right now the "experts" could be just as wrong as the "experts" of Galileo's years