Experiments can be had. Look at the fluids. Look at what is in those fluids. Find out what those fluids do in you body. Find out what Zinc does. Look at the consequences for zinc depletion. Look at natural remedies. You could do an experiment. Try to do a week of Flab and then a week of No Fab and then take notes. Compare the two.
Not really... You need a big enough sample size to come to scientifically valid conclusions. I'd like to read a peer-reviewed scientific paper about it. Or, ideally, several of them.
How big is big enough and how small is too small? If there are trillions and trillions of aliens, or other humans, on planets, in other galaxies, in parallel universes, then how can any number be suffice as we humans here, when compared with them? Subjectively speaking, you can argue either way, and doing so degrades science. If somebody kills you, is there a valid conclusion if you were the only one killed?
Science seems to be your religion. The scientific method are things people do. You seem to assume that everything scientists say and do are flawless, perfect, in how they go about experimenting, in testing theories. One example is the Carbon-14 Dating.
Science does not create facts. It creates hypotheses, which are tested and formulated until they are disproven by more recent scientific tests (e.g. when other, more precise methods are available). Thus, a scientist's perception of the world is ever-changing, though some theories such as the theory of gravitation (gravity) have been around for a while and seem to work perfectly fine on Earth (I usually don't float around after jumping but fall back to the ground - this is gravity). Do you land on the ground after jumping or do you hover/fly? If you don't fly, chances are that science also works where you live.
A few more examples:
Do you take aspirin when you have a headache?
That's applied science - thanks to biochemistry, I don't have to have a headache anymore.
Do you use toothpaste?
Thanks to chemists (and dentists), my teeth are healthy. I hope yours are, too!
Do you use a computer of some sort or a smartphone? (Or any other technical device? Or a car or public transport perhaps?)
You probably do. Thanks to physicists and engineers, who "believe" in science, you can post unscientific stuff on the internet and travel the world - or just commute to work.
Oh, and just because of the whole Adam and Eve thing:
Have you ever heard of inbreeding?
If not, google the Habsburg lip -this happens when people marry their cousins and have children with them.
If we assume that all humans have one couple (Adam and Eve) as their common ancestors, we would look a lot worse than we do. (Btw: You'll find more about the results of inbreeding - or incest as it is called among humans - here, here, and here:
)
If Adam and Eve are our common ancestors, chances are that inbreeding/incest must have occurred. We'd be pretty much doomed if that was the case.
Perhaps you should just get your exegesis right. Have a nice weekend - I'll be out and about helping others and having a great time with my friends instead of arguing with strangers on the internet. I hope you will, too!
Experiments can be had. Look at the fluids. Look at what is in those fluids. Find out what those fluids do in you body. Find out what Zinc does. Look at the consequences for zinc depletion. Look at natural remedies. You could do an experiment. Try to do a week of Flab and then a week of No Fab and then take notes. Compare the two.
Maybe these videos clarify what I mean:
The videos here agrees with what I am saying.
Not really... You need a big enough sample size to come to scientifically valid conclusions. I'd like to read a peer-reviewed scientific paper about it. Or, ideally, several of them.
How big is big enough and how small is too small? If there are trillions and trillions of aliens, or other humans, on planets, in other galaxies, in parallel universes, then how can any number be suffice as we humans here, when compared with them? Subjectively speaking, you can argue either way, and doing so degrades science. If somebody kills you, is there a valid conclusion if you were the only one killed?
Google "representative sample size". There are mathematical models for it.
Science seems to be your religion. The scientific method are things people do. You seem to assume that everything scientists say and do are flawless, perfect, in how they go about experimenting, in testing theories. One example is the Carbon-14 Dating.
Science is not a religion. Let me explain:
Science does not create facts. It creates hypotheses, which are tested and formulated until they are disproven by more recent scientific tests (e.g. when other, more precise methods are available). Thus, a scientist's perception of the world is ever-changing, though some theories such as the theory of gravitation (gravity) have been around for a while and seem to work perfectly fine on Earth (I usually don't float around after jumping but fall back to the ground - this is gravity). Do you land on the ground after jumping or do you hover/fly? If you don't fly, chances are that science also works where you live.
A few more examples:
Do you take aspirin when you have a headache?
That's applied science - thanks to biochemistry, I don't have to have a headache anymore.
Do you use toothpaste?
Thanks to chemists (and dentists), my teeth are healthy. I hope yours are, too!
Do you use a computer of some sort or a smartphone? (Or any other technical device? Or a car or public transport perhaps?)
You probably do. Thanks to physicists and engineers, who "believe" in science, you can post unscientific stuff on the internet and travel the world - or just commute to work.
Oh, and just because of the whole Adam and Eve thing:
Have you ever heard of inbreeding?
If not, google the Habsburg lip -this happens when people marry their cousins and have children with them.
If we assume that all humans have one couple (Adam and Eve) as their common ancestors, we would look a lot worse than we do. (Btw: You'll find more about the results of inbreeding - or incest as it is called among humans - here, here, and here:
If Adam and Eve are our common ancestors, chances are that inbreeding/incest must have occurred. We'd be pretty much doomed if that was the case.
Perhaps you should just get your exegesis right. Have a nice weekend - I'll be out and about helping others and having a great time with my friends instead of arguing with strangers on the internet. I hope you will, too!