If you disagree with me you could google the answers easily. You don’t because y

If you disagree with me you could google the answers easily. You don’t because you know you’re not capable of analyzing the different sources, interpreting them, comparing them, and coming to a conclusion. Instead you have to rely in popular press interpretations.,

I never ever submit to doing people’s research for them to compensate for their pretense of knowledge and demonstrationg of ignorance.

If you knew anything about the controversy over the scientific method, you’d know that it ended in a dead end in the eighties and nineties. You probably cant comprehend the reason, but it’s because there is no via-positiva method (justificationary) there is only the work of creating instruments to measure different properties of the universe, and then subjecting those measurements to the tests I listed.

Now, if you were even vaguely intelligent, or educated, you would come back to me with knowledge of that controversy, the reason philosophy and set mathematics came to similar dead ends, and why physics has stagnated, and how economists and computer scientists discovered why those things happened. It’s hard enough explaining the diagonal method and Godel’s limits. And it’s harder still to explain why it’s obvious because math is just a trivial language, and all language is infinitely recombinant because there is no limit to recombination. Instead, there is a limit to mathematical reduction, because set of possible mathematical reductions is smaller than the existentially possible recombinations.

Now, I know this is all over your head.
I know you can’t and won’t do the research to test my statements.
I know that at any given time there are two to five people in this world capable of debating me on most of these subjects. And here I am trying to defend myself from an overconfident mouth breather.