After you watch the video you can read the transcript I made, and below that is the original interview transcript with Don Menn, oh his friend Matt Groening is also in that interview asking Frank about TIME. Here is the two transcripts on the page i made jus for this occasion bogart9.com/zappa.html

As you know Einstein did experiments to prove all this stuff but you should also know that Einstein fell out of favor of the scientific community after his huge hit E=MC squared. You can only have a big hit on the charts for so long. Seriously look that up, Einstein was picked on and picked apart in the latter half of his life. There are competing theories to Mr. Einstein. Now we know FZ is one of them!

Things change as we learn new stuff, science is final, up until it isn't. Science can update at any time in space. In January 2024 they discovered a impossibly huge ring of galaxies that might lead us to change everything we know about how the universe began. This ring of galaxies, appropriately called the "Big Ring," has a circumference of nearly 4 billion light-years. Thats no small donut. That's no small Sofa, back when the universe consisted of nothing more elaborate than Mark Volman.

This intergalactic ring-shaped superstructure of galaxies and galaxy clusters —  is so fuqqing large it defies explanation. This structure lives so deep in the universe that we see it as it was some 9.2 billion years ago. What kills me is that what we see is billions of years ago, that it takes billions of years for this visual if you will to get to us. We never think of the visual (light) of an image, images are made of light, to last more than a fraction of a moment that it is seen. Imagine the neighbors dog blew a fart and it goes thru space for a million years. When we look at stuff in space, that crap might be long gone a long time ago but we are only just now seeing it.

It says for example, if your structure is 500 million light years across, light would take 500 million years to move from one end to the other. However, the particles we are talking about in this new discovery are moving much more slowly than light, so it would take billions of years to create a structure of this size, and the universe has only been around for about 14 billion years."

Since lately, because of the dramatic increase in trolls (bullshitters) the label of “scientifically proven” has also become a potent marketing and disinformation tool. There’s an increase in suspicion of scientists and technology, and plenty of interest in vague stupid comforting alternative philosophies.

Can We Ever Really Prove Anything? It is often said that nothing is ever absolutely proven in science. This is true to some extent in that, contrary to anti-science propaganda, science as a method is quite open-minded and aware of the limitations of human reason, and so the method allows for the possibility that any idea, no matter how established and venerated, can be proven false with adequate evidence. However, realistically there are some propositions that achieve a level of supporting evidence that makes any serious doubt about their truth perverse and irrational.

The Earth is not flat nor poised on the back of a stack of turtles. Similarly, it is often said that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, meaning that something as yet not thoroughly tested scientifically cannot be dismissed as false, only regarded as unproven. This is certainly true as well.

Unfortunately, in the world of internet grifters, trolls and political hoodwinker wankers this idea is often twisted into a claim that nothing can be regarded as false without an unachievable standard of voluminous and perfect quality evidence against it. But in the real world, we can’t have perfect evidence for everything, and we must apportion our limited resources rationally. You can’t say everything is fake news just because you haven’t seen something.

Great details of scientific evidence are less compelling to pojamma people than heartwarming testimonials with far less real evidentiary value. This gives faith-based explanations a significant public relations advantage over science and skepticism. The Vatican just last week announced updates to norms to authenticate visions of Mary, weeping statues, stigmata and other highly ambient domains.

The Hierarchy of Evidence. The core of evidence-based science is the idea that not all evidence is created equal. One key principle to bear in mind is that we are by nature inclined to generate and trust evidence that confirms our beliefs. Even the smartest and most honest scientists and the Muffin man have deep, unconscious biases in favor of their own ideas, and these biases influence how they conduct their work and how they interpret data in the Muffin Utility Research Kitchen.