>>13935834How is it useless if it tells to those who trusts the science that science doesn't know, but prefers to hold on to retarded theory instead of rigorously admitting its ignorance?
I am a linguist and I know that half of my field is completely pseudoscientific (except the decypherment part, that half is alright) so knowing humans I expect such a situation in every other field, so come on, tell me some more of things like that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5dvUVuwcxg 
