Scientific facts do not exist

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

duplicate ... hmm

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

I just don't get your passion in this. it seems like it is a process, of observing, hypothesisizing, experimenting, calculating, refining, in ideas and matter.

what's the harm if I go through life thinking it's a process? a scientific fact process?

Scientific process is a process of determining recognition of fact or falsification of fact. Not all processes have and perhaps ever will lead to recognition or falsification of successful formula for example thus there are no facts resulting in scientific process of verification or falsification. The fact is the end result, recognition or falsification and the way to get there is by scientific process. There is no such thing as a scientific fact, it is either the end result which is recognition or falsification of fact or it is scientific process to determine recognition of the fact or falsification of the fact. I mean if you really want to lie to yourself thus beat your own head off the wall, I think that is rather silly Hat ...

There are way too many lies circulating Hat, time to clean this rubbish permanently and globally.

https://www.brighteon.com/36b271ea-9582-490d-9bba-641d2776bc3a

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

As a person educated in science I can say, without reservation, that this is one of the most wacked out and illogical examples of a circular reasoning logical fallacy I've ever seen. Jeffery...I'm sure your family and loved ones have told you this many times already but you really need to seek professional help.

Then back your sick obvious lie up in the form of a weak and pathetic un backed claim you tout by simply sharing one valid example of scientific fact. We are all about to see you the liar is (I already do)

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

thought experiment a:

if you had a kid, and it came home from school and said, " mommy/daddy, today I learned that facts aren't scientific!", would you feel good about that education?

better fact than lies.

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

Nope. No theory is ever proven True. Science does not use supporting evidence at all.

Truth is the garbage that crumbles when pit vs fact every single time. right theories are never proven true, they are either verified as fact, falsified or an on going scientific process.

Say, do you need a crow bar to wrench your head out of there to finally see past your rectum?!! Get some air, get your head out of there.

Oh in your delusional little world, no one had to go through a scientific process to learn a successful formula thus made it fact for example that from that point we had a successful formula to harness electricity.

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

As a person educated in science I can say, without reservation, that this is one of the most wacked out and illogical examples of a circular reasoning logical fallacy I've ever seen. Jeffery...I'm sure your family and loved ones have told you this many times already but you really need to seek professional help.

Then back your sick obvious lie up in the form of a weak and pathetic un backed claim you tout by simply sharing one valid example of scientific fact. We are all about to see you the liar is (I already do)

 

[Into the Night]

Scientific process

Science is not a 'process', 'procedure', or 'method'. It is just the set of falsifaible theories themselves.

is a process of determining recognition of fact or falsification of fact.

Fact has no relation to science.

Not all processes have and perhaps ever will lead to recognition or falsification of successful formula

A successful formula is just a successful formula. It is not science, fact, or proof.

for example thus there are no facts resulting in scientific process of verification or falsification.

Facts are not tests. Science isn't a 'process'.

 

[Into the Night]

Then back your sick obvious lie up in the form of a weak and pathetic un backed claim you tout by simply sharing one valid example of scientific fact. We are all about to see you the liar is (I already do)

No such thing as a 'scientific fact'. Science is theories, not facts.

 

[Iolo/Penderyn]

Either recognized as falsified or recognized as fact, almost (the process incomplete) doesn't qualify as fact.

In the magic sense you mean, there are no facts - just sustainable hypotheses.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Then back your sick obvious lie up in the form of a weak and pathetic un backed claim you tout by simply sharing one valid example of scientific fact. We are all about to see you the liar is (I already do)

You're making a logical fallacy out of the principle that all scientific knowledge is tentative. That is an important principle in science as it helps to make science self correcting when new knowledge or information is discovered that affects existing knowledge.

A scientific fact is an observation that has been confirmed repeatedly and is accepted as correct. Here's a very good example of an observation that has been confirmed repeatedly and accepted as correct. You're nuts.

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

Science is not a 'process', 'procedure', or 'method'. It is just the set of falsifaible theories themselves.

Fact has no relation to science.

A successful formula is just a successful formula. It is not science, fact, or proof.

Facts are not tests. Science isn't a 'process'.

Oh it is not a fact that modern computer models exist according to a liar like you, or that it took a successful formulas through scientific process to make it a fact that they now exist lmfao!!! Why waste your time spewing such obvious and pathetic lies, jealous much?

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

No such thing as a 'scientific fact'. Science is theories, not facts.

Oh so you can read the title of this thread "Scientific facts do not exist"

Mott The Hoople claimed (as anyone can see by scrolling back) "illogical examples of a circular reasoning logical fallacy I've ever seen" and so I asked him to back such rubbish by simply sharing one example of scientific fact. Like I previously stated I suspect you get it even subliminally and now you verified that you get that there is no such thing as scientific fact. Took you long enough slow poke.

bravo, piece of cake and my pleasure.

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

In the magic sense you mean, there are no facts - just sustainable hypotheses.

No incomplete as in a lame theory for example, not magic at all.

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

That is the stupidest thing I ever read!

Yet we don't see one valid example of scientific fact from you go figure ...

 

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

You're making a logical fallacy out of the principle that all scientific knowledge is tentative. That is an important principle in science as it helps to make science self correcting when new knowledge or information is discovered that affects existing knowledge.

A scientific fact is an observation that has been confirmed repeatedly and is accepted as correct. Here's a very good example of an observation that has been confirmed repeatedly and accepted as correct. You're nuts.

You make up more lies in the form of vacant un backed claims Instead of sharing one valid example of scientific fact, evading the foundation of this issue while desperately scrambling to try and make irrelevant drivel the issue only reveals an intellectual coward. Remember the title of this thread "Scientific facts do not exist". Here you are desperately scrambling to try and make your irrelevant rhetoric the issue to try and hide that you are unable to contest the fact that there is no such thing as scientific fact. Thanks for sharing you the liar is.

A confirmation is the end result of a scientific process hence recognition of the fact is the end result, not the process that it took to recognize the fact since your brain appears to be way too small to realize something so obvious all by yourself.

My pleasure sonny bunch.

 

[Scut Farkus]

You make up more lies in the form of vacant un backed claims Instead of sharing one valid example of scientific fact, evading the foundation of this issue while desperately scrambling to try and make irrelevant drivel the issue only reveals an intellectual coward. Remember the title of this thread "Scientific facts do not exist". Here you are desperately scrambling to try and make your irrelevant rhetoric the issue to try and hide that you are unable to contest the fact that there is no such thing as scientific fact. Thanks for sharing you the liar is.

A confirmation is the end result of a scientific process hence recognition of the fact is the end result, not the process that it took to recognize the fact since your brain appears to be way too small to realize something so obvious all by yourself.

My pleasure sonny bunch.

please help me separate facts from truth.

 

[Into the Night]

In the magic sense you mean, there are no facts - just sustainable hypotheses.

A hypothesis is not something that is 'sustained'. It simply is.

 

[Into the Night]

You're making a logical fallacy out of the principle that all scientific knowledge is tentative.

There is no such thing as 'scientific' knowledge. Science is a set of falsifiable theories, not knowledge.

That is an important principle in science as it helps to make science self correcting when new knowledge or information is discovered that affects existing knowledge.

Science is not knowledge. No theory changes, once created. It may be falsified, but the theory itself never changes.

A scientific fact

There is no such thing as a 'scientific' fact. A fact either is, or isn't. There is nothing 'scientific' about any fact.

is an observation

Observation is not part of science. All observations are subject to the problems of phenomenology.

that has been confirmed repeatedly

Repeating an observation is not a proof. All observations are subject to the problems of phenomenology.

and is accepted as correct.

An observation is not a proof. It does not prove a theory, nor does it even prove the observation itself.

Here's a very good example of an observation that has been confirmed repeatedly and accepted as correct.

Where?

You're nuts.

YALIF. Not a proof, not an observation, just another lame insult fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Oh it is not a fact that modern computer models exist

Not a fact. A proof. Proof by Identity. Computer models are not science and never were.

according to a liar like you,

I never said computer models do not exist.

or that it took a successful formulas through scientific process

Science is not a 'process'. A formula is not 'successful', or not. It simply is. Computer models have nothing to do with science and never did. Several make lousy random number generators though.

to make it a fact that they now exist

Not a fact. A proof.

Why waste your time spewing such obvious and pathetic lies, jealous much?

YALIF.

 

[Into the Night]

Oh so you can read the title of this thread "Scientific facts do not exist"

It happens to be true.

Mott The Hoople claimed (as anyone can see by scrolling back) "illogical examples of a circular reasoning logical fallacy I've ever seen" and so I asked him to back such rubbish by simply sharing one example of scientific fact.

There isn't any. You seem to think there is.

Like I previously stated I suspect you get it even subliminally and now you verified that you get that there is no such thing as scientific fact. Took you long enough slow poke.

I never said otherwise. Contextomy fallacy.

bravo, piece of cake and my pleasure.

Paradox. First you argue there are scientific facts, then you argue there are not. Which is it, dude?