{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
3/18/2015 5:17:03 PM
1
The context and definition of "theory" that a scientist may use is different from that we use.
We some one like a physicist puts together a theory, it's usually after long research and collection of evidence and data to support it.
English
-
But if they have the evidence and proof to support it, shouldn't it be labeled as fact?
-
Too presumptuous, people not in the field or every day skeptics (like the -blam!- head down the street that never believes your story) would rip the scientists a new one.
-
So you have faith that this person did everything correctly and is right? You trust that this scientist is 100% correct? Are scientists always right?
-
Perhaps somethings are just better left unknown...
-
I rather like knowing that time and space, or some of it, was condensed into a super hot mass and then -blam!-ING EXPLODED INTO A BIG GASSY UNIVERSE THING!
-
But we don't know that.
-
There is actually enough evidence to support it.
-
Enough evidence for who?
-
For what? For when? For why? For where? For how?
-
Really?
-
Yea, Google it.
-
Edited by Onxide: 3/18/2015 6:07:14 PMIf that's so, then there must be a purpose for life in the universe right?
-
-
Have you ever heard of the Biocentric universe theory?
-
-
Google it.
-
I intend to.
-
It's a very interesting subject.
-
I think my brain melted a bit.
