• lil_tank [any, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        No idea, I didn’t see this one

        However I remember her making a whole video about being skeptical of nuclear fusion, which made sense for me at the time except now we’re seeing so much progress in that field I’m wondering if she could be also wrong about this lol

        • EelBolshevikism [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          thanks this is the silliest thing I’ve seen passed for science in recent memory

          This specific theory would be irrelevant materially too, correct? Because you wouldn’t be able to detect what the universe “knows” without woo woo magic. In fact wouldn’t the end result just be some sort of other explanation but with “works due to natural laws” replaced with “a physics wizard did it”?

          • impartial_fanboy [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            Oh yeah it wouldn’t change a god damn thing, arguing about it would be literally pointless. Same thing as arguing against free-will, either it exists or it doesn’t. Debating it is pointless, finding out one way or the other is pointless since in both cases nothing changes.

            • EelBolshevikism [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 months ago

              the only way free will is relevant to debate or things like this are relevant to debate is if it’s the kind that has a puppet master making us do stuff AND it’s possible for us to kill them