Janic wrote:except that what is tangible (takes a dico) is what is observable, not what is explicable.except that the only "tangible" thing is that we breathe, the chemical mechanism was not discovered until much later because precisely there is nothing "tangible" in the fact that we absorb oxygen and that CO2 is released.what does not suit me is to see that an ignoramus who does not even want to know a subject, takes himself for a connoisseur and throws anything because he has read fake news on social networks. So start by studying the subject BEFORE playing the boat. We'll see later if you start to know what you're trying to talk about.And so if the proposals I made don't suit you, which one do you suggest instead? (so as not to divert the question to avoid answering it !!)
so what ? how the fact that I would be ignorant would prevent you from rectifying my insufficiencies, by proposing your own characterization of the H? How does the fact that there are terraplatists prevent us from saying that the Earth is round and from explaining how we can estimate its radius?
Your argument has no logic, other than the obvious one to slip away by refusing to make your own proposals.
But the thread remains open, you can still do it.