>>4
Ignoring your blatant le re/g/b/it shitposting format, did you mean
"(not science) and wrong" or
"not (science and wrong)" (which, of course, expands to "(not science) or (not wrong)"
?
Un-ignoring the fact it's an imageboard shitpost, I only had to ask you this because your poor formatting and grammar totally stripped away any form of context for me to parse the intended meaning (if there even was one).