Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
1) The explanatory theory is Model A and the theory of dual elements attracting, related to physics and mathematics.

2) It's not theories alone that account for causation, but experimentation. With repeated, peer-reviewed results yes. And lo and behold, we have the operationalised types and repeatable methods ready for them at this point!

And I will eat my turds before I agree with you on anything like this here.
...

1) I've already told you that that can't explain when duals don't get along. Lo and behold, this "hypothesis" is invalidated by an experiment.

Of course, you can attempt to "save" this by saying "Oh, they must be mistyped... blah blah blah". But then you'd have to explain how exactly is it that they're mistyped!

2) You first have an explanatory theory, then you test the causation via an experiment. Not the other way around.

Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
Look Singu, in North America we learn about how causation is 'identified' even in highschool. You need to run controlled experiments to isolate the independent variable. Hope you have a good explanation/theory for why you can't remember this or for the low info Ni shithole you came out from, yet are foaming out of the mouth/anus trying to argue with people in science-involving fields anyway.
Because you don't get it, that's why. At least some people like Rebelondeck seems to get it.