>>932

Believe it or not, my day job occasionally includes theoretical physics and I can follow their idiotic and critically flawed publications that are as much bullshit as they are contrived and trite. Can't make your pet retard equation work out irl? Just substitute bullshit assumptions that are so obviously pulled out of their ass that it must be that the publications committees are either mongoloid nepotism awardees or high, and believe me when I say they are often high.

I was in a committee meeting for a specific publication to adjudicate something stupid and of course I can't be asked to lie, so I tore the paper a new asshole rendering the publication useless and unsalvageable. They didn't ask me back. Anyway after the meeting nearly every one of those geriatric fags had dialated eyes and I'm not saying they weren't struck by my utter beauty and fell madly in love with my man body thereby causing oxytocin overdose, but either that and/or likely prescription opioids.

>anomalities are extremely difficult if not impossible to simulate.

Hairless monkey man can't simulate simple gravitational dynamics? Why am I not surprised. But I forgive you because as a PhD you are so focused on the third hair on the wing of a specific mutated species of fruitfly you can't imagine anything else. It's understandable.