versteh ich nicht

a bit closer. a bit closer to your mouth that's better *laughter* *caughing* *laughter* ok, so the question's about the nature of scietific evidence, uhm, you *yeh* you both said and i think most people here would agree with you that we JUSTIFIED IN HODIAN(?) BELIEF if there's evidence for it or if there are logical items we can find to support it ah, but it seems like this: in its self it's a belief which will require some form of evidence, and so, if so: i'm wondering what you think would count as evidence in favour of that and if not: how do we justify choosing that PUESTIC WITHOUT APEALING TO the same standard that we are trying to justify ok so, how how do we justify, uhm, as it were faith th th that science would give us the truth - is that the? HOW DO WE JUSTIFY SCIENTIFIC NOTHING (?) Yes What he said It works. It it it works. Uhm, planes fly, cars drive, computers compute, IT'S AN INDUCTIVE ARGUMENT uhm *laughter* if you, if you, if you base medicine on, on science you kill (wollte glaub ich cure sagen :P) people if you base the design of planes on science they fly uhm, if you base the design of rockets on science they reach the moon it works, bitches *laughter&applause*

beweise?

:D danke

und das wohnmobil hat Räder verdammt

war jetzt nicht so der überflieger

ZENTRIEREN :D _HOCH_FÜNF_

danke apple! für irgendwas muss es ja gut sein

Pic-Upload.de - falscheparallele.jpg

äußerst informativ.