Because the alternative, in @darinlatham's mind, must therefore begin with a plotting snake.
@YekatWaarseth @RichardDawkins @_Four_Horsemen
-
-
Replying to @aspexit
@emlynaddison @YekatWaarseth
@RichardDawkins@_Four_Horsemen Agreed. Science, however is not the study of "nothing"!1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @darinlatham
@darinlatham @YekatWaarseth@RichardDawkins@_Four_Horsemen Science is the study of everything. "Everything" includes non-stuff.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @aspexit
@emlynaddison @YekatWaarseth
@RichardDawkins@_Four_Horsemen. If by "non-stuff" u mean "nothing" how do we know "nothing" when we "see" it?3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @darinlatham
@darinlatham @YekatWaarseth@RichardDawkins@_Four_Horsemen Why "should" it mean that? Maybe "nothing" is more complex than "something".1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @aspexit
@emlynaddison @YekatWaarseth
@RichardDawkins@_Four_Horsemen. I'm just gonna let that statement hang out there by itself. Amazing...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@darinlatham @YekatWaarseth @RichardDawkins @_Four_Horsemen Yes, let it hang out there--like your inability to grasp that others understand.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.