Is Terrence Howard The Real Life Tony Stark

[The Lonious Monk]

Disagree. This isn't a competition. It's science and discussion of ideas. It doesn't have to be a me vs you, winner/loser.

Not saying ndt has to do it. He don't have to explain shit. I'd love to see it tho.

Props to him for the vid.

What? lol Debates are competitions, and there are winners and losers. NDT and Howard have opposing ideas. If they debate, someone is coming out as the loser. Bro, I've been to scientific conferences and seen people from the audience make presenters cry because they found mistakes in their presentations and basically disproved their research on the spot. Shit is deeper than ya'll think.

 

[ChicagoFigure]

What? lol Debates are competitions, and there are winners and losers. NDT and Howard have opposing ideas. If they debate, someone is coming out as the loser. Bro, I've been to scientific conferences and seen people from the audience make presenters cry because they found mistakes in their presentations and basically disproved their research on the spot. Shit is deeper than ya'll think.

I'm saying it doesn't have to be a debate. It can be a discussion.

 

[Bed$tuy🇭🇹]

Neil Degrasse Tyson is knowledgeable as Bill Nye.
I dont take them serious.

 

[AZTG]

An idea of a debate is cool, but you dont sit there and debate with words in science. Thats the issue.

Lets say I do an experiment and prove x is real. I have to publish my results and steps from my experiment. The experiment can be just solving a math problem, or some wild shit with tools and controls. Whatever the case, i need to publish my steps on how I proved x with that experiment.

Then some scientists looks at my experiment and recreates it to either prove or disprove my work. Or he runs his own experiment to prove or disprovr my work, then publishes that in response.

In science sitting there and debating with words is pointless cause its just me saying im right and you saying no im right.

Thats why debates dont happen in science

 

[Dwayne]

An idea of a debate is cool, but you dont sit there and debate with words in science. Thats the issue.

Lets say I do an experiment and prove x is real. I have to publish my results and steps from my experiment. The experiment can be just solving s math problem, or some wild shit with tools and controls. Whatever the case, i need to publish my steps on how I proved x with that experiment.

Then some scientists looks at my experiment and recreates it to either prove or disprove my work. Or he runs his own experiment to prove or disprovr my work, then publishes that in response.

In science sitting there and debating with words is pointless cause its just me saying im right and you saying no im right.

Thats why debates dont happen in science

Your first sentence is my train of thought.

 

[GOAT]

Debates dont need winners and losers, that is not true.

And as far as the Theory of Everything it can be and does get debated/discussed. It is an unsolved mystery.