a B C
If you don't differentiate between constraint and discussion, it seems a bit serious to me anyway ...
this is why you do not know, nor can you discuss, not being a scientist but a scientist belonging to a sect, the AFIS, composed of broken arms that cannot be repaired. And your only arguments are crook, charlatan, it's just sugar, etc ... which characterizes these sects in question, strong in their ignorance
So do you think that these people were characterized precisely by a particularly strong will to discuss and exchange (politely) arguments with those with whom they disagreed?
strange....
them not because like you, they were not able to do it, since obsessed by the dogmas of their guru (Pope Innocent III, the little mustache or the AFIS) they represented the secular arm, they were not not the head. Just as you are not the head of all your assumptions and a priori well learned by heart, but their mop. executor of their low works
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
