/lounge/ - Lounge

Ultimate Manchildren's Playpen
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)


File: 1656880694632-0.mp4 (3.78 MB, 480x480, Papers.mp4)

File: 1656880694632-1.mp4 (11.12 MB, 854x480, Darwinism debunked.mp4)

 No.14159[Last 50 Posts]

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778
>Science is facing a "reproducibility crisis" where more than two-thirds of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, research suggests.
>"It's worrying because replication is supposed to be a hallmark of scientific integrity,"

https://www.wilsonquarterly.com/stories/sciences-under-discussed-problem-with-confirmation-bias/
> Research scientists are under pressure to get published in the most prominent journals possible, and their chances increase considerably if they find positive (thus “impactful”) results. For journals, the appeal is clear, writes Philip Ball for Nautilus: they’ll make a bigger splash if they discover some new truth, rather than if they simply refuted old findings. The reality is that science rarely produces data so appealing.
> The quest for publication has led some scientists to manipulate data, analysis, and even their original hypotheses. In 2014, John Ioannidis, a Stanford professor conducting researching on research (or ‘meta-research’), found that across the scientific field, “many new proposed associations and/or effects are false or grossly exaggerated.” Ioannidis, who estimates that 85 percent of research resources are wasted, claims that the frequency of positive results well exceeds how often one should expect to find them

When did you realize that science is all about confirmation bias and mental gymnastics?

 No.14160

When i realized women could become scientists.

 No.14184

Where's the 2nd from?

 No.14200

>>14160
Unironically a good one, femoids fuckin' owned lmao heh

 No.14204

>>14203
they flip flopped too much on that.

 No.14207

File: 1656909310701.gif (316.01 KB, 500x290, 159973595081.gif)

When I realized that gravity is a mathematical construct. Just like heliocentrism. There is no objective universal reference point and thus any point in the universe can be stationary and everything else is moving in reference to it. The heliocentric model means that you don't have to do as many equations as with the geocentric model. Science is more about dogma then actual pursuit of truth.

 No.14216

OP, got anything on microevolution?

 No.14230

>>14207
>Sun
>orbiting Earth

HERESY! Oh, mighty Copernicus! Smite these pagan scum!
*tips fedora*

 No.14231

>>14207
what proof is there of geocentrism?

 No.14237

>>14231
Don't listen to this heathen, brother! We all "know" heliocentrism is a "fact" despite that it doesn't rely on empirical macrocosmic observation.

*unsheathes Occam's razor*
*cleaves complexity in half*

Heh, simplicity for simplicity's sake is powerful!

 No.14242

File: 1656952596487-0.png (295.48 KB, 1426x1198, (1).png)

File: 1656952596487-1.png (278.6 KB, 1348x1288, (3).png)

File: 1656952596487-2.png (9.65 KB, 410x248, (4).png)

>>14216
I do, actually. Unfortunately they're peer-reviewed (LMAO) so I wouldn't call them reliable.

(1).
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0022519377900443

(2).
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2199970/
>A method of targeted random mutagenesis has been used to investigate the informational content of 25 residue positions in two alpha-helical regions of the N-terminal domain of lambda repressor. Examination of the functionally allowed sequences indicates that there is a wide range in tolerance to amino acid substitution at these positions. At positions that are buried in the structure, there are severe limitations on the number and type of residues allowed. At most surface positions, many different residues and residue types are tolerated. However, at several surface positions there is a strong preference for hydrophilic amino acids, and at one surface position proline is absolutely conserved. The results reveal the high level of degeneracy in the information that specifies a particular protein fold.

This study was conducted at M.I.T where the authors experimented with re-building proteins by taking away amino acids and replacing them with other amino acids. They found that some parts of a protein chain are tolerant to substitutions but other parts are completely intolerant, showing that proteins are not arbitrary collections of component chemicals but rare and unique combinations. This confirm the conclusion of my first source that the probability of a specific folded protein coming into being by undirected evolution is 1 in 10(65). The practically infinite number of other combinations that could form at random are useless protein sequences for living organisms.

(3)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022283604007624
>Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds

This paper is just a technical way of saying that new enzyme folds are impossible to produce by natural selection. This experiment set out to measure the sensitivity to destabilization of proteins. When proteins are destabilized they lose function and if they lose their function they cannot continue to exist, which means further transformation or conversion into other proteins become impossible. This loss of function gives a measure of the rarity of stable functional folds. You could say that you need a miracle to produce a self-replicating cell out of nothing.

(4)
ttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC58511/
>Searching sequence space for protein catalysts
>This study provides a quantitative assessment of the number of sequences compatible with a given fold and implicates previously unidentified residues needed to form a functional active site.
>Misplacement of catalytic residues by even a few tenths of an angstrom can mean the difference between full activity and none at all.
>Our estimate of the low frequency of protein catalysts in sequence space indicates that it will not be possible to isolate enzymes from unbiased random libraries in a single step.
>The required library sizes far exceed what is currently accessible by experiment, even with in vitro methods

This study determined that you cannot prove evolution experimentally because the amount of trials you would need is beyond anything that is remotely possible.

 No.14309

>>14242
>(1).png
>spontaneous biogenesis requires the generation of "complexity" not "order"

Spot on. Fusing random ingredients together doesn't create life.

 No.14353

>>14237
so no proof other than lol fedora?

cool

 No.14366

>>14353
There is no evidence for heliocentrism, only calculations.

 No.14386

>>14366
There's no evidence i cummed in yer mums pussy only the fact that you exist

 No.14389

File: 1657104158028.jpg (63.27 KB, 323x408, 143607151071.jpg)

>>14386
He's right, though. No needs to be upset.

 No.14395

oh look, another tldr ctrl c ctrl v thread

 No.14396

File: 1657126353002.jpg (960.61 KB, 1782x2000, (you).jpg)

>>14395
>tldr

Do you need flashing lights, anime characters and various illegal substances in order to achieve happiness? Yep, it's ADHD.

 No.14399

>>14396
no but having not being able to even condense your posts to a tldr is a mark of your woodbrain

 No.14400

File: 1657129538580.png (932.28 KB, 1591x1447, Cerebral palsy.png)

>>14399
Maybe if you stopped grinding your teeth you could focus enough to read a few semtences.

 No.14401

>>14400
shut up hoe pull up

 No.14460

>>14386
I know you can't accept that your illusion is shattered. It's fine.

 No.14467


 No.14471

Science is the opium of the fedoras.

 No.14479

>>14467
tf is this

 No.14512


 No.14523

>>14512
That video sums up atheism pretty neatly.

 No.14814

File: 1657651952905.webm (3.29 MB, 1280x720, Fedora'd.webm)


 No.15137

File: 1657994482551-0.jpg (158.98 KB, 997x1024, 1657983054530m.jpg)

>>14242
https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/devitt_06
>in Southern California where the muted western form (eschscholtzii) and the blotchy eastern form (klauberi) live together and actually do interbreed, producing blurrily blotched hybrids
>they do sometimes interbreed

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20298702/
>Evolution and instability in ring species complexes
>Ring species are a biological complex that theoretically forms when an ancestral population extends its range around a geographic barrier and, despite low-level gene flow, differentiates until reproductive isolation exists when terminal populations come into secondary contact. Due to their rarity in nature, little is known about the biological factors that promote the formation of ring species.

>theoretically

>rarity in nature
>instability in ring species

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9780470015902.a0001751.pub4
>A ring species is a monophyletic group whose range has expanded around a geographic barrier producing a ring‐shaped distribution. Populations that make up the ring should be contiguous and without barriers to gene flow except at one location where two reproductively isolated populations co‐occur. Ring species that meet this definition provide an opportunity for studying how speciation occurs through the gradual accrual of differences leading to reproductive isolation. However, few if any of the species that have a ring‐shaped distribution meet these requirements. The most studied species, greenish warbler Phylloscopus trochiloides and Ensatina eschscholtzii salamanders, fail to exhibit all of the characteristics of a strict ring species.

>few, if any of the species that have a ring‐shaped distribution meet these requirements

>fail to exhibit all of the characteristics

Evolution is theoretical, not factual. Only low IQ morons believe it. Speciation has never been observed in nature. If you claim that your ancestors descended from niggers you insult your whole bloodline.

 No.15148

>>14389
>>14460
Lol no I agree with you guys I just saw an opportunity to roast anon and I had to take it

 No.15284

>>14207
>There is no objective universal reference point and thus any point in the universe can be stationary
false. imagine for an instant that a rocket launches off of earth and into space. if youre a drooling retard you may think that your space ship is at rest and that the earth (5.972 × 10^24 kg) suddenly started moving away from your space ship at multiple kilometers per second, however, upon any examination at all we can conclude that objectively your space ship must be moving because there was no event capable of moving such a massive object so fast so instantaneously. moreover, while flying around in deep space, light years away from earth, if you assume yourself to be at rest you would find that the earth and everything in the universe would accelerate every time you hit the gas on your rocket thrusters. being able to instantly accelerate all the mass in the universe minus yourself is what you defend if you defend jewish relativity "science".

 No.15390

>>15137
Good post.

 No.15989

>>15390
Oy vey, questioning gravity and the speed of light as constants? Quickly, call the Albert Einstein defense league!

 No.16478

>>15989
Ironic how physicists don't really have any idea how fast light travels. I guess they follow their hunches.

 No.16734

File: 1659886089222.jpg (685.66 KB, 3840x2160, 1606492738530.jpg)

>>15989
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2017/11/13/how-do-we-prove-a-well-established-theory-like-gravity/
>There is no way to absolutely rule out the idea that gravity is caused by invisible, insubstantial pixies that have an obsession with everything having to be as close together as possible.

In reality gravity as a measurable force is not proven. The phenomenon of objects falling to the ground is called gravity and that's all it is: a word. Physicists have to add it as a mathematical equation in order for the theory of relativity to make sense but, in fact, there is no tangible force that you can see, hear, feel or detect.

 No.16807

>>16734
Good to know.

 No.17022

When you are a gullible teenager you think science can answer everything.

 No.17197

>>17022
The Amazing Atheist is a good example why you should never buy a fedora and worship science.

 No.17207

Uh - I hope you don't find anything better to do? Heh!

 No.17670

>>17022
What you call scientific knowledge nowadays is mostly overhyped and misunderstood extrapolations.

 No.17686

File: 1660586326929.pdf (1.5 MB, scientist.pdf)


 No.17806

>>17670
Interesting. So no one knows what life really is or how to replicate it.

 No.17823


 No.17868

File: 1660768511547.jpg (924.77 KB, 960x1440, 20220608_162107.jpg)

>>17813
NEL

 No.18333

>>17823
Thanks.

 No.18638

>>17806
>science
>reliable

 No.19186

Only if you are devoid of critical thinking then science will give you all the answers.

 No.19188

>>19186
dum retart

 No.19380

>>19186
Science? More like mongoloid chromosomes.

 No.20101

File: 1662707667675.mp4 (8.94 MB, 888x480, 1619360887-001.mp4)

>Darwinism debunked.mp4

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1979.tb00027.x
>the tympanic membranes and the tympanic processes of the stapes in recent mammals, reptiles + birds. and frogs. are not homologous;
>the evolution of “special periotic systems” in the ancestors of amphibians and amniotes were independent events
>the amphibian tympanic membrane. probably including that of labyrinthodonts. is not ancestral to that of amniotes. and that labyiinthodonts with an otic notch are not suitable as amniote ancestors

Just a friendly reminder that there is no proof that vertebrates evolved from amphibians and that the fossil record does not support the scenario of some random fish-lizard crawling up on land and suddenly evolve lungs out of nowhere.

 No.20111

>>20101
fedoralords btfo

 No.20395

>>20101
Anything that goes against the current scientific narrative becomes instantly labeled as pseudo-science. I have yet to see anything tangible when speaking about "evolution".

 No.20396

>>20395
and who the fuck are ‘‘you’’?
an ignorant conspiratard. your opinion has 0 value

 No.20431

File: 1663013716789.png (329.63 KB, 500x486, taungchild.png)

>>20101
Great paper! Thanks for the information. It reminds me of this:

https://phys.org/news/2014-08-taung-child-skull-brain-human-like.html
>By subjecting the skull of the first australopith discovered to the latest technologies in the Wits University Microfocus X-ray Computed Tomography (CT) facility, researchers are now casting doubt on theories that Australopithecus africanus shows the same cranial adaptations found in modern human infants and toddlers – in effect disproving current support for the idea that this early hominin shows infant brain development in the prefrontal region similar to that of modern humans.

All the fossils discovered in Africa that supposedly prove we descended from apes are really just dead apes. Their cranial structure, in reality, have no value in terms of evidence. They're so far removed from us physically that only wishful thinking will prove anything.

 No.20447

>>20395
Most keyboard warriror atheists have no idea what they're talking about. They can only regurgitate talking points that Richard Dawkins has already spouted a billion times.

 No.20456

>>20431
Very interesting. I wonder how many leaps of faith anthropologists make when they can't find clear similarities.

 No.20634

>>20456
They do not really have evidence, though. Just a lot of gaps.

 No.21275

>>20634
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2012.11555
>DNA has a 521-year half-life

When people say we come from monkeys I laugh. There is literally no genetic evidence to support this idea because DNA breaks down too fast.

 No.21368

File: 1663746988334.png (12.52 KB, 1144x225, 16254145126.png)

>>21275
The molecular apparatus has complex ways of generating insertions and deletions in DNA, which we are only beginning to understand. For example, a stretch of DNA from a ribosomal RNA gene is forty bases long in humans and fifty-four bases long in orangutans. The sequences on either side match up perfectly. How do we know what bases correspond between the two species, how do we decide how many substitutions have occurred, when obviously some have been inserted and deleted as well? The problem is that we cannot tell which DNA sequence alignment is right, and the one we choose will contain implicit information about what evolutionary events have occurred, which will in turn affect the amount of similarity we tally. How similar is this stretch of DNA between human and orangutan? There may be eight differences or eleven differences, depending on how we decide the bases correspond to each other across the species—and that is, of course, assuming that a one-base gap is also equivalent to a five-base gap and to a base substitution. This is the fundamental problem of homology in biology: What is the precisely corresponding sequences in the other species? The answer is that no one knows. Since you don't have genetic remains that have been preserved for millions of years, as with all the empty hominid skeletons in Africa, you have no case. It's guesswork and not solid proof.

The structure of DNA is built up of four subunits. Our reproductive cells has a length of DNA encompassing approximately 3.2 billion of these subunits, but there are still only four of them. This creates a statistical oddity. In other words, two stretches of DNA generated completely at random, completely independently of one another, would not be zero percent similar, but rather, would be 25 percent similar. Comparative genetics doesn't really help you in this regard.

 No.21446

Reminder that if you're a fedora you are quasi-autistic.

 No.21450


 No.21457

>>21450
Sad, but true.

 No.21776

File: 1664113393832-0.jpg (106.51 KB, 644x222, Genome size.jpg)

File: 1664113393832-1.jpg (42.99 KB, 600x556, mental gymnastics.jpg)

>>21368
Good post! I would like to add some points to your line of reasoning. Even when you compare genomes of different creatures in this world, you see that the greatest amount of genetic information does not equal complexity or progressive transformation into higher states of organization.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK20255/
>A conclusion that two (or more) genes or proteins are homologous is a conjecture, not an experimental fact. We would be able to know for a fact that genes are homologous only if we could directly explore their common ancestor and all intermediate forms. Since there is no fossil record of these extinct forms, a decision on homology between genes has to be made on the basis of the similarity between them, the only observable variable that can be expressed numerically and correlated with probability

There are different mutations like somatic and germ-line. Somatic mutation arises once in every million cell divisions, and so hundreds of millions of somatic mutations must arise in each person. Many somatic mutations have no obvious effect on the phenotype of the organism, because the function of the mutant cell, even the cell itself, is replaced by that of normal cells. However, cells with a somatic mutation that stimulates cell division can increase in number and spread. This type of mutation can give rise to cells with a selective advantage and is the basis for all cancers. But germ-line mutation can be passed to future generations, producing individual organisms that carry the mutation in all their somatic and germ-line cells. When we speak of mutations in multi-cellular organisms we’re usually talking about germ-line mutations. In single-cell organisms there is no distinction between germ-line and somatic mutations, because cell division results in new individuals.

By default, bacteria should mutate more often, developing into new organisms by the millions but you don't see bacteria doing that. Also, when geneticists compare different genes and their components they assume everything originates from one source (some vague, hypothetical, primordial bacterial ancestor in a giant ocean) but in reality there is no explanation as to why it must be only one source. No evidence is presented nor is any rationale supported by this evidence.

 No.21791

you nerds will say atheism is cringe but then reject Christ

L
M
A
O

 No.21794


 No.21810

>>14203
Most of those soyboys are operating on instinct; an instinct to follow the herd. Don't take their love of high status words like "science" and "facts" too seriously.

 No.21951

>>21776
>By default, bacteria should mutate more often, developing into new organisms by the millions but you don't see bacteria doing that.

Speaking of mental gymnastics:

https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/scientists-discover-organism-that-hasnt-evolved-in-more-than-2-billion-years
>Scientists discover organism that hasn’t evolved in more than 2 billion years

Picture this. You are such a hardcore Darwin fanboy, that even though you find bacteria that has undergone trillions of mutations during an unfathomable time span and defied the very principles that define evolution by not transforming into something else, you still think evolution is true. This, my friend, is super ultra mega hyper cope.

 No.22339

File: 1664477416881-0.png (13.53 KB, 640x480, 31b44431a0b6de78631b065d90….png)

File: 1664477416881-1.png (5.2 KB, 640x480, 4349abde712b4b7bea5e7c9f0c….png)

File: 1664477416881-2.png (6.52 KB, 640x480, ecf719e8865c15055d5d4b0afe….png)

>>21951
Mutation rates in prokaryotic cells are calculated per cell division and when you look at what causes mutations it is mostly spontaneous replication errors. Replication is amazingly accurate because fewer than one in a billion errors are made in the course of DNA synthesis. So when bacteria propagate themselves they rarely produce new genetic features and when they do it's harmful, genetic mistakes that aren't beneficial to the organism (typical mutation rates for bacterial genes range from about 1 to 100 mutations per 10 billion cells, which is practically nothing). A huge amount of genetic information and an enormous number of cell divisions are required to produce a multicellular adult organism. Even a low rate of error during copying would be catastrophic. A single-celled human zygote contains 6 billion base pairs of DNA. If a copying error occurred only once per million base pairs, 6000 mistakes would be made every time a cell divided and those errors would be compounded at each of the millions of cell divisions that take place in human development.

Neurofibromatosis is a disease that produces numerous tumors of the skin and nerves. It results from mutations in a gene called NF1 and it shows how synthesis of DNA is a complex process, fundamental to cell function and health, in which dozens of proteins, enzymes, and DNA structures take part in the copying of DNA. All you need is a single defective component, such as a DNA polymerase and it will disrupt the whole process and result in severe disease symptoms.

What you need, in order to prove evolution as factual, is impossible amounts of beneficial mutations that luckily enough will make bacteria morph into jellyfish or any other kind of animal but this isn't demonstrable. You can only rely on wishful thinking.

 No.22404

>>22339
how will fedoras ever recover? btfo

 No.22790

>>22339
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01620-3
>The long-term evolution experiment (LTEE) has become a cornerstone in evolutionary biology that researchers continue to mine for insights. During their 75,000 generations of growth, the bacteria have made huge gains in their fitness — how fast they grow relative to other bacteria — and evolved some surprising traits.

https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/JB.00831-15
>The LTEE isolation of Cit+ mutants has become a textbook example of the power of long-term evolution to generate new species. But, based on our results, E. coli arrives at the same solution to access citrate in days versus years, as originally shown by Hall. In either case, genes involved in the process maintain their same function but show expanded expression by deregulation. Because of this, we argue that this is not speciation any more than is the case with any other regulatory mutant of E. coli.

Even the "best" example of "evolution" has been debunked. E. coli have innate ability to change which does not involve any novel traits that appear out of nowhere.

 No.22792

>>22790
>We conclude that the rarity of the LTEE mutant was an artifact of the experimental conditions and not a unique evolutionary event. No new genetic information (novel gene function) evolved.
>no new genetic information evolved

 No.22833


 No.22860

>>22855
>Doesn't know about electric retard

How nu are u within these tubes friend

 No.23094

File: 1665048483997.mp4 (7.82 MB, 638x360, Science.mp4)

>>22790
>No new genetic information (novel gene function) evolved.

Darwinism is absolutely ridiculous.

 No.23099

File: 1665048820854-0.jpg (1.45 MB, 1600x900, CRTV-3369-March-April-Soci….jpg)

File: 1665048820854-1.jpg (152.56 KB, 800x533, weed-nugget-bud.jpg)

File: 1665048820854-2.jpg (100.07 KB, 700x467, certain-cannabis-bud-strai….jpg)

File: 1665048820854-3.jpg (187.59 KB, 1320x880, tangerine_power.jpg)

nugspam

 No.23606

>>23094
There is no proof for evolution as a whole. Only people outside of academia believes it without questioning anything.

 No.23751

>>23606
If you have high school tier knowledge about evolution then it might sound reasonable but otherwise it is kind of silly.

 No.23823

>>23751
The average fedora owner is too lazy to do research.

 No.23944

>>23094
>that mp4

lmao

 No.24126

File: 1665940782303-0.png (444.87 KB, 1366x2210, 1665612042152242.png)

File: 1665940782303-1.jpg (122.54 KB, 481x617, 3739887011323217.jpg)

File: 1665940782303-2.jpg (294.89 KB, 600x848, big fucking titties!.jpg)

>>23606
>no proof for evolution as a whole

Exactly. What is even more surprising is that no one knows how old our planet is.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02597188
>The potassium-argon method is attractive for dating volcanics since it can be applied to rocks of Pleistocene age and older, thus encompassing important periods of general volcanic activity. However it has been found that dates obtained on whole rocks and on included minerals frequently show gross discordances. 

Funkhouser and Naughton at the Hawaiian Institute of Geophysics used the potassium-argon method to date volcanic rocks from Mount Klauea and got ages of up to 3 000 000 000 years when the rocks are known to have been formed in a modern eruption in 1801.

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1957Natur.179..213C/abstract
>Where is the Earth's Radiogenic Helium?

If the earth is billions of years old, the radioactive production of helium in the earth's crust should have added a large quantity of helium to its atmosphere. Current diffusion models all Indicate that helium escapes to space from the atmosphere at a rate much less than its production rate. The low concentration of helium actually measured would suggest that the earth's atmosphere must be quite young.

 No.24226

>>24126
>big fucking titties!.jpg

Nice. Very nice.

 No.24246

>>24226
>muh cumbrain

 No.24247

>>24126
lol, I wonder who has the balls to actually claim to know for sure what the age of the planet is.

 No.24258

>[ - ]

 No.24416

File: 1666091261919.jpeg (44.54 KB, 331x402, 27F5D5B4-ED65-4763-BE2E-A….jpeg)


 No.24496

>>24416
LOL saved

 No.24653

>>24416
You can tell who is scientifically illiterate: the guy who opens a thread full of facts and sources just to hide it because it makes him experience cognitive dissonance.

 No.24673

>>24653
the average atheist, in other words

 No.24830

>>24673
*tip*

 No.24840

>>24126
You have scientists that tell you that the universe is bilions of years old because of some radiation they can detect in the void but ironically they have no real point of reference.

 No.25157

>>24840
Is there any man-made measuring system that isn't flawed? I doubt it.

 No.25158

Science has been put on a pedestal by people that lack any sort of critical thinking. They say they are rational but when someting challenge their world view they become fanatic like muslims and start to spout nonsense and vitriol.

 No.25430

>>25158
I agree. You turn a mode of inquiry into a whole set of nihilistic talking points that only reaffirm your own meaningless life.

 No.25588

>>25158
Those are the same kind of people that watch George Carlin and laughs at The Big Bang theory.

 No.25609

>>25594
take your meds

 No.26054

>>25609
I think he overdosed on medication.

 No.26064

>>25430
Science has become more of a pop culture phenomenon than actual research.

 No.26835

File: 1667674748159-0.mp4 (1.58 MB, 854x480, Stolen bicycle.mp4)

File: 1667674748159-1.mp4 (2.37 MB, 640x360, Nate Higgers.mp4)

>>26064
Science, when used by the general public as a definition of ultimate truth, has become so watered down and only gives you the impression that nobody really have any idea how it works.

 No.27025

>>26835
The average person has no grasp of what science means. They just read that some study said something and accept it no matter what.

 No.27026

>>27025
nigger youre on 4chon.me, all anybody does here is believe studies and dailystormer articles

 No.27027

>>27026
Just because fokvid spams 100 dailystormer articles a day doesn’t mean we all subscribe to that retardation

 No.27031

>>27025
Exactly.

 No.27033

>>27027
>fokvid
you mean HDV

 No.27040

>>27033
>>27035
conspiracy: HDV and FoKvid are the same person (Phantasm)

 No.27050

>>27040
meds jake, now

 No.27090

>>27040
Conspiracy: Avid is gay (my source for this theory is that a lot of his posts are homosexually charged)

 No.27344

Whenever people talk about science I immediately stop listening because it's mostly autistic screeching that gets repeated (Bill Nye the Science Guy and his audience are the worst kind of autists).

 No.27352

>>27344
I hate pop science garbage.

 No.27477

>>27344
According to science, Jews are supposedly extremely intelligent but when you break it down it starts to become more obvious that it is skewed research.

 No.27479

Why even bother with doing an anti-science thing? If you follow the simple rational that everything the Jews have fed us through the education system, government and media is a lie it also follows that science is nothing but lies.

The holocaust isn't real either but I don't waste my life trying to convince people of that either. People are going to believe what they believe until they decide to not believe it anymore. Nothing I do can accelerate or retard that. In fact actively trying to convince people is likely to entrench them further. Either you're smart enough to see through the bullshit eventually or your not. There is no rhetorical fight to be had.

 No.27486

>>27479
Why not? Scientists are the new priesthood class in society and pretty much everyone just nod their heads in approval and agree that science is the only truth.

 No.27490

>>27486
For exactly the reasons I mentioned

 No.27492

>>27490
You sound like an apathetic defeatist. If everyone had your attitude we would all wallow in our own feces and lie on the ground to rot.

 No.27514

>>27492
>bro, why should i wipe my ass? it’ll become stained later on when i take another shit

 No.27523

>>27514
I can wipe it clean for you, with my tongue of course

 No.27525

>>27523
>dude, why wouldn’t i let you lick my ass? wiping my ass is tiresome and makes my wrist hurt

 No.28275

>>27514
Unfortunately that sentiment is all too common among.

 No.28285

>>27492
There are many defeatists in our midst and most of them are Internet vagrants with zero purpose in life. They only visit websites like this one because they're bored.

 No.28289

>>28285
My purpose in life is to defeat the jews though however

 No.28291

>>28289
In that case I wish you the best of luck.

 No.28293

>>28291
Thanks i'll need it heh

 No.28550

When people talk about science you usually see the Dunning-Kruger effect in full swing.

 No.28777

>>28550
Vegans are some of the worst science promoters out there because all they do is sit and masturbate to graphs and charts all day long.

 No.29284

File: 1669014849744.mp4 (2.63 MB, 858x480, fragility.mp4)

>>28777
>Vegan Gains

lol, the most unstable human being on YouTube. He gets injured as soon as he works out and he has severe mental issues. He even has an OnlyFans account and puts dildos in his ass for money.

 No.29297

>>29284
How do you tear a muscle from sneezing? Damn, he must be weak as hell.

 No.29473

>>29297
Niggers are brittle. Sneezing is like a hate crime to them.

 No.30475

File: 1669471952049.mp4 (8.04 MB, 854x480, Bumblebees.mp4)

>>28550
The biggest issue with science is that the vast majority of scientists never think outside the box.

 No.31451

File: 1669887905844.mp4 (226.45 KB, 360x360, transnigger trauma.mp4)

>>29473
>Niggers are brittle

 No.32455

File: 1670420931071.mp4 (2.69 MB, 480x480, Anime.mp4)

>>31451
They are. Their necks are extremely sensitive.

 No.32598

>>30475
That’s a pretty cool theory.

 No.33277

File: 1670755972508.mp4 (15.31 MB, 854x480, Marble machine.mp4)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350862574_Psychophysical_interactions_with_a_double-slit_interference_pattern_Exploratory_evidence_of_a_causal_influence
>For the experimental data, the outcome supported a pattern of results predicted by a causal psychophysical effect

https://physicsessays.org/browse-journal-2/product/1424-4-dean-radin-leena-michel-and-arnaud-delorme-psychophysical-modulation-of-fringe-visibility-in-a-distant-double-slit-optical-system.html
>...these results were found to support von Neumann’s conclusion that the mind of the observer is an inextricable part of the measurement process.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287506033_Reassessment_of_an_independent_verification_of_psychophysical_interactions_with_a_double-slit_interference_pattern
>Baer's independent analysis confirmed that the optical apparatus used in this experiment was indeed sensitive enough to provide evidence for a psychophysical effect.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258707222_Consciousness_and_the_double-slit_interference_pattern_Six_experiments
>The results appear to be consistent with a consciousness-related interpretation of the quantum measurement problem.

Apparently there is a strong aversion within the scientific community regarding how consciousness tends to go beyond regular cause and effect when you measure its influence on its surroundings. The materialistic interpretation of reality fails to explain why these unusual occurences exist and why you can never see a physical link between these events.
When you examine the so called "laws" of physics you begin to realize that they are only applicable to our known corner of this unfathomable universe. How do you prove entropy exists in other parts of the cosmos if you have no clue what the conditions are or how to study them? It all boils down to assumptions and conjecture. How do you know the speed of light doesn't change depending on where you are or if matter behaves the same way everywhere? Physicists can only grasp a tiny fraction of everything that is contained in the giant void.

 No.33384

>>33277
Materialists BTFO.

 No.33387

File: 1670849905778.jpeg (32.03 KB, 599x594, 1670523199692.jpeg)


 No.33388

File: 1670849935541.gif (717.81 KB, 500x600, 1670737569069119.gif)


 No.35102

File: 1671369526223.mp4 (2.62 MB, 640x360, disease.mp4)

>>33384
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001FoPh...31..837D/abstract
>Reciprocity of knowledge and organization vindicates Wigner's claim that "reciprocal to the action of matter upon mind there exists a direct action of mind upon matter"

Most physicists are actually scared of talking about the uncertainty of matter. They've realized that the deeper you dissect the framework of reality, the more you become less and less convinced of its absolute hegemony.

 No.35228

>>35102
Only fedora tippers think materialism is a valid point of view.

 No.35755

>>35228
Atheism is poison.

 No.35777

>>35755
Correct. I distorts your point of view.

 No.35781

>>35228
also rap musicians

 No.35782

>>35777
Trips

 No.35861

>>35781
They are called niggers, sir.

 No.37440

File: 1672593264797.mp4 (13.62 MB, 854x480, Jigaboos.mp4)

>>35861
Porch monkeys.

 No.37584

File: 1672620388908.jpg (88.05 KB, 750x912, https __pbs.twimg.jpg)

>>35861
how do u even call middle class millennial and zoomer white guys with aencyclopedic knowledge and adoration of all the iq 90 'lil scoon'-s and 'yung jigger'-s

 No.37757

>>37584
Self-hating oikophobes.

 No.39660

File: 1673229502336.jpg (35.79 KB, 510x540, Fl7S1dSacAEo6cc.jpg)


 No.39679

>>37584
Brainwashed.

 No.39694

>>37584
A h'White nigger once told me that rappers that can free-style are high-IQ geniuses. I assume brainlets believe that you must be really smart if you're well-practiced in anything.

 No.39703

File: 1673285628443.jpg (95.47 KB, 648x796, 1673211491910312.jpg)

>>39694
> I assume brainlets believe
..let people get their ego's stroked.

 No.39721

File: 1673293225642.png (413.9 KB, 727x700, 1673207032132986.png)


 No.39853

>>14159
>When did you realize that science is all about confirmation bias and mental gymnastics?
>all about
That's not true though.
When the science community (professors, students, universities, laboratories etc.) was much smaller and less commodified (19th and early 20th century) as well as public interest being not nearly as widespread it was still ideal.

Now that the public cares about "science", corporations can just pay the overabundance of "experts" to publish something in their favor to gain trust. Governments will do this too.
Funnily enough, OP is using the standards of empirical science to prove that they're a valuable asset instead of proving the opposite.

 No.39858

>>39853
Science is pretty much devoid of meaning today. It's just manipulative skewing.

 No.39959

File: 1673386292694.gif (3.1 MB, 600x450, SillyBlondDuckbillcat-size….gif)


 No.40069

>>39858
Soyence.

 No.40317

>>40069
Soyence is soyentific.

 No.40338

Sometimes I've thought about doing independent studies, but I know that probably nobody would read them or care, or whine about the data I'm able to collect with a limited budget.

 No.40339

>>40338
>limited budget
(you), take care of (you) first. Don't drain yourself of funds that (you) don't have. Support yourself FIRST!!! Everything else will fall into place. Keep tabs on stuff and do what you're able to.

 No.40428

>>40338
The thing about research is that it is time consuming. You can do it but it usually is tedious.

 No.41129

>>40428
The fedora tipper fears the independent researcher.

 No.41131

>>41129
Fedora tippers only listen to what Richard Dawkins think.

 No.41250

>>41131
People who obsess over science are usually autistic as fuck.

 No.41404

>>41250
This. The most awkward pseudo-intellectual spergs think science is an authority that applies to everything.

 No.41411

>>41250
Whats wrong with autists?

 No.41442

>>41411
People on the internet are mean.

 No.41501

>>41442
Do you have autism?

 No.41503

File: 1674159257717.png (1016.45 KB, 1440x1672, 1674075305745.png)

>>41501
Nope!

 No.41637

Relevant. I suggest skipping to 4:56.

 No.42159

File: 1674551397392.jpeg (27.4 KB, 502x417, 93E386EF-4D15-4A89-BB41-4….jpeg)

>>41411
>Whats wrong with autists?

 No.42162

>>42159
Nothing it was just a question, i am autistic

 No.42174

File: 1674560788153.gif (252.13 KB, 220x301, dog-sniff.gif)

>>42159
I've only met mean, vicious, nasty one's. I have built up a traumatic revulsion towards them. Gif related is me when I get word that someone has the tism,burgers, spectrum! Thanks 4chon!

 No.42227

>>42174
You will never experience the bliss of a wild bustling imagination, normal people like you are born of satan

 No.42255

>>42227
Satan is cool.

 No.42296

>>42255
You poor poor soul

 No.42312

>>42296
Your poor life.

 No.42316

>>42312
My life is beautiful

 No.42325

>>42316
Your vegetable brother is in heaven vomiting all over himself 24/7!

 No.42329

>>42325
I am not Smiley! I am curious though as to how you came to such a conclusion, is it the literate nature of my posts?

Infact dont answer me son of kane, you arent worth talking to about anything

 No.42331

>>42329
Smiley put down the crack pipe lol.

 No.42345

>>42331
Are you going to continue to deflect?

 No.42347

>>42345
Deflect from h'what?

 No.42358

>>42347
The fact that i stated that i wasnt this person you are talking about

 No.42362

>>42358
nigger

 No.42494

File: 1674726583373.gif (2.55 MB, 480x360, autism.gif)


 No.42560


 No.42564

>>42560
Pretty much every poster on 4chan.

 No.42594

>>42564
The only people posting on cuckchan anymore are feds and AI.

 No.42595

>>42594
Why so NEL bro?

 No.42606

>>42595
NEL is all I know.

 No.42610

>>42606
Sadge

 No.42883

File: 1675151921928.jpg (2.26 MB, 3008x2000, DSC_0015.JPG)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6415937/
>Basic philosophical assumptions count as biases because they skew the development of hypotheses, the design of experiments, the evaluation of evidence, and the interpretation of results in specific directions.
>Philosophical biases are typically acquired from science education, professional practice or other disciplinary traditions that define a scientific paradigm. This is why scientists with varying backgrounds might adopt different philosophical biases.

Occam’s Razor, as an example of philosophical bias, shows that scientists tend to conform to a certain way of thinking. Simple answers are easy to digest and scientists always choose easy solutions. Consensus is the rule they all follow. Science isn't objective, it's portrayed as objective.

 No.43055

>>42883
Science boils down to how much shit you can make up.



[Return] [Catalog] [Top][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]