>>4398039i remember seeing a comment
i think it was the debate between some theologian and hawking about religion or something.
the comment was unironically like this
>steven is smarter so i believe him 100% of the timenow steven is very smart, but i wouldnt trust him to build a bridge or something because its not something he studied (i think anyway for all i know he's also an engineer its just an example). why do people put someone who might be extremely smart in one field of knowledge and tout their opinions on EVERYTHING as if its proven because he's smart in one field?
