> We know this as science progressing one dead person at a time > We have deep flaws as a species. Speak for yourself. 'We' doesn't know anything or have any

> We know this as science progressing one dead person at a time > We have deep flaws as a species. Speak for yourself. 'We' doesn't know anything or have anything. The perceived collective consensus view on whatever, is actually just a projection - it is not really there. 'Facts' are consensus opinion, deferral to expert opinion - the term (defined by the royal society) has authority and hierarchy baked in. https://www.etymonline.com/word/fact https://www.etymonline.com/word/fact With regards to science, the scientific method applied personally, should count with oneself - if one understands oneself to be a rational thinker the method is great. If one is rational, able to change one's mind as one verifies (or fails to verify) this-or-that then great. If one prefers to read articles on science sites and believes one now 'knows' something (without personal verification) one is choosing to believe one knows. This is not actual knowing - to call a 'belief' -> 'knowledge' is a subversion of the meaning of the term. Ultimately knowing facts is a subjective endeavour, objectivity is not possible. One cannot take oneself out of the experience, no matter how hard one pretends to be objective. One can pretend one is a 'we' (psychotic behaviour) and that 'we know this or that' when we merely read an article or watch a video somewhere. If you ask me, this is to be so deluded and disassociated from reality, that it is like being in the middle of the ocean and thinking one is climbing a hill as one is lifted by a wave.