I cant much find were to start digging into this to make it as simple as possible that even a barmaid could understand it. So ill start with this
DNA is synonmyous with inbreeding. isnt it funny? how we KNOW about dna because he "understand" inbreeding.
so DNA which has never been photographed in person, is suggested as "EXISTING".
then we end up with this thing call genetics, when you ask whats that, you get "in our genes" "your genes" or "inbreeding"
So we understand what Genetics and DNA is from inbreeding.
but do we know what inbreeding really is? Do we know it enough to declare DNA as real?
I propse in this case, that DNA doesnt exist.
And for the explanation, we never know what inbreeding is until we observe it.
Remove the observer and do real science. Science doesnt require an observer. it takes 2 objects to have location, and shape, which are the requirements to exist.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/reclaiming-rationality-and-scientific-method/21302
this article lays out how all of the ecological "things" we see today are rally based on the economy.
The reason for all the confusion is noone knows what inbreeding is and its laid on society like we must do it. Must understand and show by "showing, example" it. if not you are a barbarian. no its not enough to say you know after observing.
i wanted to make this after reading the link i posted and to state that DNA can't exist, I've never had inbreeding explained, we dont know what it is only observe then name it.
ANd this is a grey area for me as some of its from memory ive been donig this studying for a long time and some of its fairly fresh and hasnt been spent much time with over by me.
Theres 2 types of concepts we understand
1 comes from things explained from the Plato's cave allegory. Shadows on a wall we see cast. its not from the sun or source of everything we know about where the universe is from. without light we cant see shit
The visible light spectrum is another example like it.
DNA is synonmyous with inbreeding. isnt it funny? how we KNOW about dna because he "understand" inbreeding.
so DNA which has never been photographed in person, is suggested as "EXISTING".
then we end up with this thing call genetics, when you ask whats that, you get "in our genes" "your genes" or "inbreeding"
So we understand what Genetics and DNA is from inbreeding.
but do we know what inbreeding really is? Do we know it enough to declare DNA as real?
I propse in this case, that DNA doesnt exist.
And for the explanation, we never know what inbreeding is until we observe it.
Remove the observer and do real science. Science doesnt require an observer. it takes 2 objects to have location, and shape, which are the requirements to exist.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/reclaiming-rationality-and-scientific-method/21302
this article lays out how all of the ecological "things" we see today are rally based on the economy.
The reason for all the confusion is noone knows what inbreeding is and its laid on society like we must do it. Must understand and show by "showing, example" it. if not you are a barbarian. no its not enough to say you know after observing.
i wanted to make this after reading the link i posted and to state that DNA can't exist, I've never had inbreeding explained, we dont know what it is only observe then name it.
ANd this is a grey area for me as some of its from memory ive been donig this studying for a long time and some of its fairly fresh and hasnt been spent much time with over by me.
Theres 2 types of concepts we understand
1 comes from things explained from the Plato's cave allegory. Shadows on a wall we see cast. its not from the sun or source of everything we know about where the universe is from. without light we cant see shit
The visible light spectrum is another example like it.
