Trust the science
(files.catbox.moe)
Comments (21)
sorted by:
The real answer is the studies are observational, ie they don't control for variables, so they have limited scientific weight. This is why they can wildly contradictory results, and the media publishes them as if they were gospel.
One of the main purposes of science is to enshure that theories of our world have no contradictions. You could not do it without searching for contradictions. Finding contradiction just means that theory is wrong and should be replaced or rewriten. It's the inalienable part of scientific research. You make theory, you check if experimental results align with theory predictions and look for contradictions to proove or dicsprove theory.
I don't even know who is worse in that case - Daily Mail who reports on some studies like they are scientific fact, or one who made this meme based on complete ignorance.
Science, and scientific approach is very important today. It is the only practical way of finding the truth that is not completely perverted yet. And those who are trying to bury science itself, instead of burying MSM, corrupted scientists and those who make profit on that, definitely is not on the side of truth.
Yes.
theory is when hypothesis get some mathematical form.
Hypothesis is like "phenomenon A connected with phenomenon B"
Theory is like "phenomenon A is proportional to square root of phenomenon B"
Hypothesis is a broad assumpion about existence of connection of A and B. Since absence of something could not be proved, there is nothing to prove or disprove yet.
Theory is a next stage of obtaining knowledge that could already be practically verified by experiment and could be proven or disproven.
You are absolutely right, math is not absolutely necessary, proof could be obtained without it, just in most cases especially in physics/chemistry, some math appears when hypothesis become theory.
Strictly speaking, it's not math, it is predictability, which provide way of proving/disproving. If you could predict outcome of your hypothesis given input variables/conditions, and so could check if it happens in reality, it is already a theory.
Trust the silenced'
Enjoy the Science
I was into body building for a while, and i read everything i could get my hands on. I stayed with it long enough to notice that eventually they do a 180 on every claim. I eventually gave up trusting what they had to say, dismissing them as a bunch of charlatans. At the time i wrote it off as simple incompetence, but in retrospect, its probably a psyop.
“Once everything the American public believes is false, our disinformation program will be complete”
~ William Casey, CIA boss
if there is any effect, it probably highly depends on how the egg is cooked. most hard boiled eggs are overcooked and all the nutrients are basically gone. undercooked eggs will have more nutrients, but if they are too undercooked they might also have the bacteria.
I’ve been eating sieges a day on average, boiled, scrambled, sunny side, whatever the fuck I feel like. Sometimes I’ll eat the entire dozen in one sitting. I train regularly, eat only foods that come from the ground, no subhuman goyslop. I’m in my mid 40s, strong, healthy, and have single digits bf%.
Live your life the opposite of all these subhuman jew propaganda tries to gaslight the world, and avoid all their poisons as much as you can, and I promise you, you will shape your vessel and mind into a warrior.
The Daily Mail is not The Science
it's like using the New York Post
They're citing studies, which are also not scientific fact, but certainly a lot more honest than just saying "the daily mail is not science"
i can't be bothered to look, but I will lay 3:1 odds the studiesdo not conclude either of the headlines in full, or perhaps type 1 vs type 2
For some reason that catbox thing never works for me. Just a white square
a) The line in-between the pictures implies ones life being moved from inception towards death; while both pictures imply suggestions by others tempting one to ignore perceivable.
Suggested tempts one to want vs not want from others (imbalance); while perceivable implies being want (temptation) within need (resistance), hence ones struggle to sustain self as choice within balance.
b) Looking at "daily mail" implies ones consent to suggested, which permits others to define; redefine and contradict the suggested.
c) Notice that a "mail" can be utilized both to send towards others and to defend self...depending on ones free will of choice. Notice further that sending a letter tempts others to consent to "let" one send...whatever others choose.