It does not need to be discovered. It needs to be theorised and proved possible. It has. If you have the conditions for fire, then you eventually have fire. Just because it hasn't been burning in a way we can see it when we have chosen to observe, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. The OP is saying, because we haven't observed it, does it really exist anywhere else, the obvious answer is yes.
No one observed the big bang but evidence and study show have created a consensus on that idea, but apparently the same level of scientific investigation and consensus of the evidence on the idea of fire is not enough for you. I'll say it again, stop being a pedantic twat waffle just to win some meaningless technical point in a meaningless argument.
No one cares how clever you think you are. You are arguing for the sake of arguing. Next, you'll work on correcting my grammar. That's how obvious you are.
Ad hominem, the last resort of the desperately wrong. I didn’t say it doesn’t exist, literally the post title says we haven’t observed it. That is not the same as saying it doesn’t exist. You’re just mad cuz you’re wrong in your original comment and I provided proof you’re wrong. EDIT spelling
As for ad hominem, criticising you for your style of argument and the way in which you are just arguing for the sake of it is accurate, as your argument on it's own is piss weak, but I checked your comment history, it is littered with your own ad hominem attacks and the massive d-bag hypocrisy of actually telling other redditors not to use ad hominem attacks. I guess you must very often, ion your own words, be desperately wrong then huh? You are a fat arsed hypocrite and you know it. If you'd like i could copy and paste your own shithead responses to other comments in the last couple of months, about a quarter of your you comments are abusing other people for their comments. Would you like me to do this or are you ready to sit down and shut the fuck up like the adult child you are?
Ooh you stalking me? That’s so sweet I’m flattered. But alas you’re wrong I’m not fat and I’m getting laid tonight with multiple dudes. You’re not invited
Tell yourself whatever lie you need. Only a narcissist would think they are being stalked by a comment reply on reddit. But since you have your own comments about looking at other people's comment histories to criticise them, does that make you a stalker?
Bleh you like some gross Porn and your comment history is a cavalcade of condescension and laziness due to your staggering awareness of your own mediocrity.
I scrolled back for like five minutes in your comments and it was all the same, cruel and condescending. You need help dude, you need serious help. Why do you want to be remembered as a horrible person? I’m serious, I’m not even trying to be mean you have a serious anger problem.
Oh wow, every single one of your comments are trying to tear someone else down or insult people or hurt them. Dude does that really make you happy?
Hmm well the content on your profile is worse, wow do you have anything unique or original to post? or is your entire life stupid memes about farting? Wish you had anything interesting to criticize but it’s just blah blah blah. Move along kiddo
Your hypocrisy knows no bounds huh? Everything shitty you do is something you accuse others of. You are just pathetic.
They can also see that this is a retarded post from the start with the answer being self evident and not even needing to be asked. But look at all the pseudo intellectuals arguing over something we already have the facts on. Anyone who can navigate a simple thought process can see and here is the truth that maybe a siple google search could have led you too
In a flame, ionization of the air atoms occurs because the temperature is high enough to cause the atoms to knock into each other and rip off electrons. Therefore, in a flame, the amount of ionization depends on the temperature. (Other mechanisms can lead to ionization. For instance, in lightning, strong electric currents cause the ionization. In the ionosphere, sunlight causes the ionization.) The bottom line is that a flame only becomes a plasma if it gets hot enough. Flames at lower temperatures do not contain enough ionization to become a plasma. On the other hand, a higher-temperature flame does indeed contain enough freed electrons and ions to act as a plasma.
Everyone follow this guy to get updates on ghostbusters cuz obviously we all need that “retarded” shit. Clearly he has a lot of interesting things to say and post. Like I went through this profile and like... it was a profile.
3
u/OuthouseRedback 17d ago
It does not need to be discovered. It needs to be theorised and proved possible. It has. If you have the conditions for fire, then you eventually have fire. Just because it hasn't been burning in a way we can see it when we have chosen to observe, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. The OP is saying, because we haven't observed it, does it really exist anywhere else, the obvious answer is yes. No one observed the big bang but evidence and study show have created a consensus on that idea, but apparently the same level of scientific investigation and consensus of the evidence on the idea of fire is not enough for you. I'll say it again, stop being a pedantic twat waffle just to win some meaningless technical point in a meaningless argument. No one cares how clever you think you are. You are arguing for the sake of arguing. Next, you'll work on correcting my grammar. That's how obvious you are.