You don't need to implement a change to predict the effect of a change or science wouldn't have any predictive power. Why do we run science experiments in a lab? Because the results are applicable to things outside of the lab.

I think it's obvious that if you erect a wall it will lead to harsher sentiment towards immigrant workers from the other side of the wall. That's my opinion, and if you have some sort of data that would suggest otherwise I invite you to post it. I don't have hard data to support this position, so I could missing something.

Similarly, I think it's obvious that since the wall will be easily crossed, and most illegal immigrants get into the United States in a way that a wall wouldn't stop, that it won't have a significant impact on the amount of illegal immigrants. Again, if you have data to suggest otherwise I invite you to post it

Science is looking at some phenomena and explaining in it in a verifiable way. Simply predicting is not science. Predicting based on xxx number of experiments yielding yyy results therefore we expect yyy is science.

You can't say heat causes bacteria to spread, extrapolating it to the real world, if you've never showed this in your lab.

And glad you see that's your opinion. Lol at you trying to shirk the burden on proof. That's not how real science work. You don't claim something then say if you can't disprove it then it must be so. The burden of proof is on you when making the initial positive claim. How did they let you graduate with a science degree?

Charity will resolve the problem

A wall, is more of a deterrent than no wall. A wall and guards along the wall, will be even more of a deterrent.

It's easy to say... a wall won't stop illegal immigrants, but I'd bet those planning illegal immigration don't feel that way.

Indeed. The people; without qualification. Mexican immigrants, Antifa, Black Panthers, Muslims, trade unionists. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

"the people" being US citizens, NOT illegal immigrants.

Cholera was predicted to be a "self-replicating toxin spread through fecal matter" before it was ever identified in a lab. John Snow did science in cities during cholera outbreaks and predicted the populations that would be affected long before any lab work on cholera was done.

He did this by comparing predictions from his theory, and the miasma theory of the day, and then predicted that people who live close to a source of disease but who do not drink the water would not be infected by cholera. He made a specific prediction that, if true, would not be congruent with miasma but would be congruent with his theory. He did exactly this and effectively birthed modern epidemiology.

Your idea that science has to be first done in a lab fundamentally misunderstands the backbone of the scientific method.


Still, an opinion of mine that I admit isn't based on hard data isn't really relevant to scientific practice. We aren't doing science on this forum, and if you have data that does contradict my position then I invite you to post it. Since you have refused to, I gather that you have none and are just biting at my ankles for making you look foolish (by demonstrating that Ink's position is self-consistent even if you disagree with the facts).

That isn't stated in the Constitution.

The Constitution States citizen when it means Citizen and person when it means all people. The Supreme Court has specifically ruled on this issue

The united states is racist and evil.

Go ask the mexican government for healthcare.