Anonymous at Wed, 23 Oct 2024 14:16:07 UTC No. 16445718

>>16445714
i do this

Anonymous at Wed, 23 Oct 2024 14:21:20 UTC No. 16445723

>>16445714
Why you don't bow to graded Erlenmeyer?

Anonymous at Wed, 23 Oct 2024 17:13:44 UTC No. 16446006

Based

Anonymous at Wed, 23 Oct 2024 17:18:42 UTC No. 16446018

Yes, and?

Anonymous at Wed, 23 Oct 2024 17:22:29 UTC No. 16446031

>>16445714
it's a pretty nice flask

Anonymous at Wed, 23 Oct 2024 17:41:49 UTC No. 16446051

>>16445714
>This is your appearance
"This is what you look like." Read the goddamn notes, Ivan. Stop trying to make your own translations.
Fucking moron.

Anonymous at Wed, 23 Oct 2024 18:14:06 UTC No. 16446108

>>16446051
Kek

Anonymous at Thu, 24 Oct 2024 17:20:00 UTC No. 16447534

reminder that the people who trust the science are all pseuds and the people who doubt the science are the legitimate scientists

Anonymous at Thu, 24 Oct 2024 18:24:09 UTC No. 16447621

>>16447534
So why are you trusting a scientist's words?

Anonymous at Thu, 24 Oct 2024 18:27:26 UTC No. 16447627

>>16447534
Skepticism (or "Doubt" as you call it) is necessary, but not sufficient, to be a scientist.

Anonymous at Thu, 24 Oct 2024 18:48:15 UTC No. 16447672

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After you’ve not fooled yourself, it’s easy not to fool other scientists. You just have to be honest in a conventional way after that.

So my antagonist said, "Is it impossible that there are flying saucers? Can you prove that it's impossible?" "No", I said, "I can't prove it's impossible. It's just very unlikely". At that he said, "You are very unscientific. If you can't prove it impossible then how can you say that it's unlikely?" But that is the way that is scientific. It is scientific only to say what is more likely and what less likely, and not to be proving all the time the possible and impossible.

Richard P. Feynman

Anonymous at Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:21:40 UTC No. 16447724

>>16447672
What a faggot. No wonder he worked for the government

🗑️ EBOK at Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:23:17 UTC No. 16447725

>>16447724
Fag

Anonymous at Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:23:54 UTC No. 16447726

>>16447725
Cuck

Anonymous at Thu, 24 Oct 2024 21:28:19 UTC No. 16447874

>>16446051
lul

not to mention he typed this on a scientific device using plenty of more science stuff to send and depict it.

Anonymous at Fri, 25 Oct 2024 04:59:18 UTC No. 16448418

He was a fine man.

Anonymous at Fri, 25 Oct 2024 16:03:00 UTC No. 16449125

This is what I look like