this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
63 points (81.2% liked)
Asklemmy
48494 readers
728 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That is an assumption that it never didn't, not a proof. What are you even doing here?
You seem to have a problem with my belief, and just generally how science works but it can be remedied
I have a problem with you acting smarter than you are, not your beliefs, and no I don't have a problem with how science works. You're the one who's claiming it's something different than it is. I'm not responding after this comment, but you don't have the information you think you do. I think that's an issue for you for some reason, but it's perfectly fine to not know things.
Ok so burden of proof is on the one telling any story, then reality itself must adhere to, or challenge that or it's just a correct assumption? Also note that nobody else is allowed to have any other belief or facts to challenge the story because "nobody can know anything about anything"? It's like the debating technique of a narcissist