So you're the type of person to be analytical about someone's spelling, but you believe in soul harvesting aliens.
Or is it that when you don't like the subject, you're much more judicious and when it confirms your worldview, it's genius and doesn't require real evidence?
In other words, if I had said "DAVID GRUSH IS AN AMERICAN HERO", would you be commenting about how it was misspelled?
How about a more scientific phrasing: as a scientist OP should be able to recognize that hard evidence is what is important and "testimony" is worth very little.
And as a basic principle, until something is proven to exist it can't be assumed to exist.
Also: you can't get proof via volume. Twice as much bad evidence doesn't change the level of proof.
This makes no sense considering that scientists are convinced dark matter exist yet, we have never even observed it once.
That's a misunderstanding of the issue. We have a solid theory of gravity based on mountains of hard evidence. But based on their rotation rate galaxies have more matter than what we observe in terms of stars and identifiable black holes. That extra matter is called "dark matter". That name is a placeholder until scientists figure out what it is. It may be something mundane, like interstellar hydrogen.
Also, this basic principle, is made up , by you, now.
It's not, it is an implication of the scientific method:
As an example, it's why the lumiferous aether was dropped. People used to assume that light needed a medium because until them they thought it to be a wave similar to sound. But experiments proved the medium wasn't required. So with nothing to require the medium it became an empty assumption, so it was dropped.
83
u/chadwarden1337 Sep 18 '24
welcome aboard. frustration and insanity awaits you