Lolcow Mohammad Shafiq Khan - the man who disproved physics.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Does your semen not come from your spine? Weirdo.
Fun fact: for semen to ooze from the come out from the spine, it means that the prostate must be somewhere between vertebrae. This would mean every time the spinal column bends (such as when leaning or sleeping in weird positions) the prostate would get stimulated. It's also well-known that the prostate is really sensible to stimulation.

Therefore, by kebab logic, men orgasm each time they bend down. Remove kebab you are worst anatomist.
 
Fun fact: for semen to ooze from the come out from the spine, it means that the prostate must be somewhere between vertebrae. This would mean every time the spinal column bends (such as when leaning or sleeping in weird positions) the prostate would get stimulated. It's also well-known that the prostate is really sensible to stimulation.

Therefore, by kebab logic, men orgasm each time they bend down. Remove kebab you are worst anatomist.

So when muslim men bow down to pray five times a day... they're actually...

:surprised:
 
It's honestly not deep at all. I'm actually reading the first ten pages or so and he largely uses nothing more than high school algebra. Then grossly misinterprets his results.
He's using Algebra? Fuck, this dude makes me look like a retard.

Exceptional individual, also known as retar.d
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Exceptional individual, also known as retar.d

I love how he just fully spergs out with that word in the Facebook screenshots.

"Retards with retardation and retardedness and stuff retarding my attempts to become a famous and respected physicist, damn it!"
 
Last edited:
I'm always bothered by people like him who believe that science works in ways that it really doesn't. For example, he cites that no one wants to respond to his paper because it's right when the common consensus I have heard from professors such as one working in Tokyo at a particle accelerator is that they will always look for people to challenge their ideas because it puts them to the test. While Khan here constantly defends his theories and ignores previous evidence no matter how crackpot his stuff sounds, he refuses to adhere to one of the simplest rules of thumb in the book. If no one's paying attention you didn't explain it well enough.
 
I'm always bothered by people like him who believe that science works in ways that it really doesn't. For example, he cites that no one wants to respond to his paper because it's right when the common consensus I have heard from professors such as one working in Tokyo at a particle accelerator is that they will always look for people to challenge their ideas because it puts them to the test. While Khan here constantly defends his theories and ignores previous evidence no matter how crackpot his stuff sounds, he refuses to adhere to one of the simplest rules of thumb in the book. If no one's paying attention you didn't explain it well enough.
Yeah, scientists can differentiate dumbasses from intellectual sparring partners.
 
I honestly hate how he cites himself as a source. Major jerkass move.
This is what citing yourself basically is:
"I think this is true."
"How can you prove that?"
"Well, I said something about it before."
"Makes perfect sense."

He even advertises his own comments on articles with his full name, as if he isn't actually talking about himself.

 
Back