Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 11:52:23 UTC No. 16181313

Those are questions of epistemology. Epistemology is philosophy. But unfortunately philosophy is dead. Philosophy has been killed by German idealists, and then the Anglo analytic scum and the French postmodernist perverts defiled the corpse of philosophy.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 11:53:01 UTC No. 16181314

>>16181312
You can trust mathematicians. Everyone else is a clueless monkey who doesn't understand basic logic. Yes, that includes physics.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 11:56:27 UTC No. 16181316

My question is about medical science?

How do we know folks out there Can't provide answers of their own

Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 11:58:39 UTC No. 16181317

>>16181312
A good rule of thumb is that if you are too dumb to not understand what is and isn't a good source then you are too dumb to have a meaningful opinion on said topic and thus your opinion doesn't matter.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 12:00:13 UTC No. 16181318

>>16181312
it's not about what scientists know but the process in learning what we know.
the scientific method is all about the process of learning.
the more rigorous the method, the more likely that the aggregate of outcomes is correct.
for instance, it's entirely possible to eventually have a rigorous study that says that smoking cigarettes increases penis length.
HOWEVER, the aggregate of such studies would clearly reveal that such a lone study is an outlier and doesn't match reality.
you raise valid questions but when you adhere to rigorous standards in your studies and follow the process all of the way through, you will find that the scientific method does work, works well and contributes to our understanding of the known universe.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 12:02:19 UTC No. 16181319

Nobody likes a sore thumb, that's true.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 12:18:15 UTC No. 16181326

Not many people know, this but

Some common research suggests that endothermic bacterial cell binders are not easily displaced by ,common, soaping and activity agents as

The binding reagent will stay preferentially with a thermal source, or will not react preferentially with an agent when the common binding strength is endothermic

Similar to bath mould in the common sense, some bacterial agents have preferential binding and growth mediums and are not easily displaced by common soaps and activity agents

Such as those which the common man could associate with say
"Deep-urinary tract infection" or kidney-urine binding agent
Which can often strain blood responses and activity

Such as with bath mould, what is appropriate is an endothermic reactive agent for displacement or activity. Urinary agents such as ethyromycin or dihydro-ergotamine and -arguabally some diuretic agents would be more effective in lifting such bacterial infections

Although such things have yet to be Proven. It is the common view that these things may not yet be fully understood

Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 12:20:06 UTC No. 16181328

Sic. f.Aus.X

Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 13:06:02 UTC No. 16181384

>>16181312
>How much do scientists really know?
No field of knowledge is complete, and there's a veil of ignorance regarding how much we don't know.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 13:14:30 UTC No. 16181396

>>16181312
truth is limited
fiction has infinite possibilities