(January 15, 2019 at 6:50 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:(January 15, 2019 at 6:45 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: I accept what you can show empirically. So far it's a lot of me asking, and a lot of you "not showing" the supposed item. If you'll blindly believe something, then that's your choice. No reason for me to assume you're correct, or even incorrect, until you've got something more than just people telling you to believe something.
But...
That's not even close to the discussiion M4X.
People have been saying that Astronomers have been seeing certain things when they look out into the sky with their various telescopes.
What their telescopes show is the empirical evidence.
The galaxies swirling around in whirlpool like circles faster than gravity can allow.
That's what people here are talking about. That's emprical.
Get yourself the right telescopic set up and go watch the night sky for yourself.
So... you disagree with the Astronomers then, M4X?
Not at work.
"People have been saying..."
I don't care what "people have been saying." I care whether you can show me the authentic item or not.
If someone says pink unicorns exist, or even a billion people say they exist, I'll believe them as soon as they show me a single pink unicorn. Until then it's jut a "people have been saying" scenario. People say a lot of things and end up being wrong. That's why we use the scientific method for establishing things empirically using inductive reasoning. That way claims can be tested and proofed repeatedly. Right now you want me to believe something that not even you have established to yourself through inductive reason, and can't present to me as such, so why should I believe you just because "you have been saying" that other "people have been saying?" It's not saying you're "right" or "wrong", but rather your idea is inconclusive to me, as you've been ask many times to provide it, yet you and the other proponents who "have been saying" keep dropping goose eggs when asked.
