🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Nov 2024 23:07:13 UTC No. 16494610
>but this one study-
It’s wrong.
>but they found that-
No they didn’t.
>look at the evide-
Don’t need to.
Science has spoken.
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:30:41 UTC No. 16495417
>>16494610
big discoveries in history started by going against the consensus Galileo, Mendel, Einsteinnone of their work fit the 'peer-reviewed' standards of their time. Consensus doesn’t create new ideas it just lags behind them. If you only trust what's popular, you'll miss breakthroughs, call everything misinformation, and end up as one of many snoyboy scientists this era keeps churning out if you're not already one seeing as you post muh popsci black man
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:34:22 UTC No. 16495421
>>16494610
Albert Einstein gifted you with all his nuclear Weapons. Wht DO you do?
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:57:14 UTC No. 16495446
>>16495417
physical reality is downstream from democracy, chud
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:59:00 UTC No. 16495449
>>16495417
And that's why global warming is fake.
Nana at Thu, 28 Nov 2024 16:32:38 UTC No. 16496283
This whole thread is s°y
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 17:08:44 UTC No. 16497318
>>16495417
people say shit like this and then their revolutionary ideas are all about how vaccines make you trans and jews invented particle physics to distract the public from gnostic mysticism and CTMU
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 17:31:35 UTC No. 16497344
>>16497318
Soo, you see stuff that isn't there?
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 17:41:50 UTC No. 16497355
>>16497344
Have you been on /sci/ at any point in the last five years? You can't even have a thread on spaceflight or medicine anymore without /pol/faggots coming out of the woodwork to rant about how space is fake and vaccines will make your penis fall off.
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 17:45:59 UTC No. 16497359
>>16494610
>Most papers are garbage
>A single study overturns a field
Pick a narrative and stick to it. Is all science equally as good and every paper deserves the attention of the whole field, or are some studies done poorly or even outright falsified and only an aggregate of studies with high agreement worth the attention of the field? How do you think science works? I could use a laugh.
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 17:47:00 UTC No. 16497361
>>16497318
>>16497355
These
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Nov 2024 17:54:34 UTC No. 16497363
>>16494610
>concensus
If you’re going to make a “this guy is dumb” meme be sure to double check your spelling
Anonymous at Sat, 30 Nov 2024 18:21:40 UTC No. 16498398
>>16497361
the possibility that vaccines are imperfect only upsets you because you're vaccinate so you take any criticism of vaccines as a personal attack even when it isn't meant that way because you presume that the whole world revolves around you.
Anonymous at Sat, 30 Nov 2024 18:26:06 UTC No. 16498402
>>16498398
Too retarded to realize that neither >>16497361
nor >>16497318 are about how good vaccines are.
Anonymous at Sat, 30 Nov 2024 18:35:15 UTC No. 16498417
>>16494610
AI replacing those retards doesn't seem to be a bad thing anymore.
Anonymous at Sat, 30 Nov 2024 18:38:55 UTC No. 16498423
>>16498402
yeah /pol/ is mostly all 13 year olds with only superficial understanding of things. Still I would rather have that than some official forum where I can't post forbidden ideas
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 30 Nov 2024 21:01:55 UTC No. 16498549
>>16497318
how many grams of alumunium salts are safe for developing toddlers brain?
how fast is the speed of science?
what is the ratio of crippled people by safe and effective compared to dead count by the diseases we are giving then protection against?
why does flu still exists when billions doses of vaccine are administered every single fucking year?
should men be vaccinated against HPV strain causing cervical cancer despite them not having vagina?
can something what offers no imunisation still be considered a vaccine and can goverment blackmail its citizens to taking it to ensure herd "immunity"?
why do vacciness come with complete legal immunity from any possible consequence they cause?
why are vacines the only medical product which is not tested against placebo?
so many questions and so little knowledge, speed of science is settled.
Anonymous at Sat, 30 Nov 2024 23:30:21 UTC No. 16498683
>>16498398
Take your meds
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 02:08:12 UTC No. 16498786
>>16495421
Neither fission nor nuclear reaction (as in a nuclear reactor) are from him. Regarding the bomb you may be thinking of Oppenheimer.
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 02:15:35 UTC No. 16498791
>>16497318
fucking KEK
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 02:25:25 UTC No. 16498803
>>16495417
Yeah, but you need to provide evidence. For example most people thing beauty and attractiveness is subjective, but that isn't true if you look at the evidence. The reason people who go against the consensus are right is because people replicate their research and find the same results.
1. Female faces with an accentuated canthal tilt were preferred 93% of the time to unaccentuated faces.
-> https://journals.lww.com/op-rs/abst
2. Ideal interocular and eye-to-mouth distances that created an optimally attractive face, which demonstrated facial averagness.
-> https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien
3. Eyebrow thickness, jawbone prominence, and face height all contribute to facial attractiveness.
-> https://www.frontiersin.org/journal
4. Objective measures of facial traits predict evaluations of facial attractiveness and of kindness.
-> https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien
5. Female facial attractiveness was associated with symmetry, averageness, large eyes, prominent cheekbones, thick lips, thin eyebrows, and a small nose and chin.
-> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/155
1. Facial abnormality was associated with poor childhood health.
-> https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien
2. Men's facial masculinity correlated negatively and women's positively with respiratory disease number and duration.
-> https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien
3. Male body attractiveness correlated substantially with physical fitness.
-> https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien
4. Female facial attractiveness correlated with physical fitness.
-> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/261
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 06:28:03 UTC No. 16498947
>>16498803
Not the concensus, so its not science you lose.
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 06:33:58 UTC No. 16498954
>>16494610
Thats how the church of modern science works.
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 07:02:22 UTC No. 16498971
>>16494610
>I chose to believe what most people believe
What a unique genius.
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 12:15:54 UTC No. 16499144
>>16494610
>concensus
fucking illiterates.
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 12:24:15 UTC No. 16499147
>>16499144
Whats wrong with that, you bri'ish or something?
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 14:01:34 UTC No. 16499208
>>16499147
not-a-word is not.
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 17:26:54 UTC No. 16499339
>>16494610
Half of all scientists in the world can’t even agree that sex is binary
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 17:28:41 UTC No. 16499341
>>16495449
Climate change is real. It being blown far out of proportion is also real.
Five if it WAS as severe as scientists say, there’d be no way to circumvent it in such a divided world like this one.
It’s just something we’re going to have to live with. It’s not an apocalypse.
Anonymous at Sun, 1 Dec 2024 17:35:34 UTC No. 16499346
>>16499341
>Five
Even* stupid fucking fat thumbs on my stupid fucking phone
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 3 Dec 2024 00:59:48 UTC No. 16500740
>>16499341
>Climate change is real
nope
Anonymous at Tue, 3 Dec 2024 01:02:13 UTC No. 16500743
>>16495421
i farted
Anonymous at Tue, 3 Dec 2024 01:15:33 UTC No. 16500755
>>16500740
So you’re saying that the dinosaurs experienced Christmas
Anonymous at Tue, 3 Dec 2024 08:15:17 UTC No. 16501026
Trust. The. Science.
Anonymous at Tue, 3 Dec 2024 13:33:27 UTC No. 16501147
>>16494610
Democratic determinations of truth are fake and homosexual. Science should be a dictatorship. I get my scientific knowledge by obeying the machine elves that I communicate with when I take DMT.
Anonymous at Tue, 3 Dec 2024 16:25:40 UTC No. 16501237
>>16494610
If you only trust what's popular, you might miss breakthroughs, but if you only trust what's unpopular, you'll find mostly a lot of complete horseshit.
The ideas of Galileo, Mendel, Einstein, etc. didn't win out because they opposed the consensus, they won out because the evidence in support of their positions was overwhelming. Going against the consensus doesn't make a position any more right than going with the consensus. The evidence is all that matters.
Too many retards are convinced that they're oppressed geniuses.
Anonymous at Thu, 5 Dec 2024 01:47:45 UTC No. 16503078
>>16501237
Galileo's concept of the sun as the center of the solar system was disproved by Newton centuries ago, there was never a period of time that it was generally accepted as true by anyone other than contemporary elementary school kids who get taught a false history of Galileo as part of their 'Christianity = evil' public school brainwashing. The sun orbits the solar system's center of gravity same as every other body in the solar system does.
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 6 Dec 2024 03:09:09 UTC No. 16504465
>>16503078
Galileo cultists completely destroyed
Anonymous at Sat, 7 Dec 2024 05:19:17 UTC No. 16505549
>>16501026
What is science's pronouns?
Anonymous at Sat, 7 Dec 2024 08:10:10 UTC No. 16505605
>>16499341
I actively hope it will be an apocalypse, I hate industrial society so much
Anonymous at Sat, 7 Dec 2024 08:20:02 UTC No. 16505609
>>16494610
Serious question, Are you white?
Anonymous at Sun, 8 Dec 2024 03:25:03 UTC No. 16506380
>>16505549
>they won out because the evidence in support of their positions was overwhelming
thats not true in einstein's case, they had to invent a 95% imaginary universe to make his ideas seem real
Anonymous at Sun, 8 Dec 2024 04:07:51 UTC No. 16506390
>>16503078
You are a retard and do not understand iterative science.
Anonymous at Mon, 9 Dec 2024 04:13:16 UTC No. 16507341
>>16506390
Galileo heliocentrism was wrong, why does that upset you so much?
Heliocentrism was a bad guess based on a smattering of observations, he never did any of the type of rigorous work to confirm the theory and as a result he ended up being wrong
Anonymous at Mon, 9 Dec 2024 04:19:50 UTC No. 16507349
>>16494610
the consensus was that the Earth is flat and the negro is inferior to the white man
Anonymous at Mon, 9 Dec 2024 04:46:07 UTC No. 16507364
>>16507349
Sure but the consensus no longer supports flat earth, the data disproved it
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Dec 2024 03:03:03 UTC No. 16508370
>>16507364
by ignoring his other assertion you are asserting that the negro is in fact inferior to the white man
Anonymous at Tue, 10 Dec 2024 14:41:40 UTC No. 16508750
Mass appeal is kind of a red flag that you can’t think critically or entertain the idea that the masses may actually be wrong about something, which is basic human history 101. By God.
Again, half of the scientific community is incapable of agreeing on whether or not sex is binary. That’s fucked. Absolutely, royally fucked. A fuck ton of scientists are compromised, politically addled people.
Anonymous at Wed, 11 Dec 2024 03:59:24 UTC No. 16509463
>>16499341
>Climate change is real.
nope
its fake
try living in the same place for a few decades, you'll notice the weather doesn't change
Anonymous at Wed, 11 Dec 2024 04:44:11 UTC No. 16509506
>>16509463
I have and I’ve noticed that it has changed
Anonymous at Wed, 11 Dec 2024 06:02:02 UTC No. 16509562
>>16497355
Is this pol in a room with us?
Anonymous at Wed, 11 Dec 2024 06:17:20 UTC No. 16509573
>>16509506
You just grew older and forgot
Anonymous at Thu, 12 Dec 2024 02:49:26 UTC No. 16510325
>>16497355
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perse
Anonymous at Fri, 13 Dec 2024 03:42:54 UTC No. 16511287
>>16509562
its funny how some people can't just accept that the zeitgeist has changed. paradigm shift happens, the history of science is full of it
Anonymous at Sat, 14 Dec 2024 03:50:24 UTC No. 16512308
>>16501237
>Mendel
everyone knew about selective breeding before Mendel, farmers had been doing selective breeding for tens of thousands of year before he decided to write it down in science terminology and take credit for it
Anonymous at Sat, 14 Dec 2024 18:51:25 UTC No. 16512911
>>16512308
Mendel did the experiments to determine how genes are passed down and he came up with the idea of dominant and recessive genes, which greatly advanced the technique of selective breeding.
Anonymous at Sat, 14 Dec 2024 19:17:56 UTC No. 16512946
>>16512911
Mendel faked his findings. His results cannot be replicated. Just one more set of lies from a long line of secular hucksters trying lead people astray to compensate for their own personal inferiority.
The atheists/leftists lost 100% of their small remaining credibility the day they declared men could get pregnant. The biology and sociology "experts" are all seen as a total fucking joke now—psychopathic, beta-tier retards spewing utter nonsense in an attempt to make child-rape legal because their dicks are all so tiny.
Anonymous at Sun, 15 Dec 2024 04:04:21 UTC No. 16513413
>>16512946
people who believe in Mendelian genetics are people who've never attempted to do selective breeding. they read about it in a textbook and memorize the Mendel memes, but never try to put them into practice
and then they go around bragging about how "I know genetics" even thought they have zero practical experience in the field. i have actually done substantial selective breeding and thats why i know Mendel was full of shit. at first it was surprising when my results didn't match up with textbook predictions, but after a few years of that i got used to it and now i have a pretty good idea of how genetics actually works
Anonymous at Sun, 15 Dec 2024 04:36:46 UTC No. 16513448
>>16513413
Can you point to a book or video or article that you think accurately describes how selective breeding works?
Anonymous at Sun, 15 Dec 2024 23:18:30 UTC No. 16514157
>>16494610
Lol
Anonymous at Sun, 15 Dec 2024 23:20:06 UTC No. 16514158
>>16494610
Math doesn't lie get fucked
Anonymous at Mon, 16 Dec 2024 00:32:54 UTC No. 16514220
>>16494610
What if that one scientist is jewish?
Anonymous at Mon, 16 Dec 2024 00:48:31 UTC No. 16514235
>>16494610
imagine being famous only for being a black guy with an advanced degree, like some rare animal
Anonymous at Mon, 16 Dec 2024 01:54:20 UTC No. 16514279
Anonymous at Tue, 17 Dec 2024 05:21:37 UTC No. 16515576
>>16514279
good video
Anonymous at Wed, 18 Dec 2024 03:29:41 UTC No. 16516601
Anonymous at Wed, 18 Dec 2024 05:12:54 UTC No. 16516696
>>16494610
consensus is good, but it isn't something that happens all at once when better ideas are presented
Anonymous at Wed, 18 Dec 2024 14:37:18 UTC No. 16517047
Skeptics are dangerous. Many of the big brains in history that accounted for great and impactful breakthroughs had a lot of strange beliefs and ideas, and were a lot nutty in the brain.
The reason these people excel at times is because they entertain new and different things, however stupid, until something is bound to stick.
That’s real science. The act of poking.
Anonymous at Thu, 19 Dec 2024 03:24:26 UTC No. 16517649
>>16516696
>consensus is good
no it isn't. midwits are too dumb to understand intelligent ideas and consensus needs to be something that midwits can comprehend
Anonymous at Thu, 19 Dec 2024 17:56:15 UTC No. 16518174
>>16517047
This.
Anonymous at Thu, 19 Dec 2024 19:12:36 UTC No. 16518235
>>16494610
He is only interested in da grass and da money.
Anonymous at Thu, 19 Dec 2024 19:15:11 UTC No. 16518237
>>16495417
>heir work fit the 'peer-reviewed' standards of their time
peer-review is a mid 20th invention, so of course none of their work fit its mold
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 13:40:07 UTC No. 16519072
Had Neil saw an actual UFO, I wonder how he'd react. I wonder how he'd word it to his peers, or if he even would.
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 14:48:55 UTC No. 16519103
>>16519072
Neil doesn't believe you should trust anecdotes so he would just reject his own experience. After all, It's n = 1, it wasn't peer reviewed, no control group, and humans are notoriously bad at remembering.
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 17:22:40 UTC No. 16519270
>>16519103
So he’d willingly make himself stupid in the moment. “Nope. Not seeing it. It’s not there. Nope.”
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 18:52:51 UTC No. 16519321
>>16497318
>DA JOOS!!!
meds
Anonymous at Fri, 20 Dec 2024 20:27:39 UTC No. 16519385
Consensus says liberal democracy works...
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 13:21:30 UTC No. 16520017
>>16497355
vaccines are unnecessary, simple as
if they were necessary you would not exist
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 14:07:02 UTC No. 16520027
>>16497318
>vaccines make you trans
> jews invented particle physics to distract the public from gnostic mysticism and CTMU
Yes.
Anonymous at Sat, 21 Dec 2024 14:41:22 UTC No. 16520050
>>16497318
>>16497355
>b-but muh strawman
if you think like this you also unironically belong on /pol/ because that kind of politically tribalistic and dogmatic mindset certainly isn't anything close to scientific
Anonymous at Sun, 22 Dec 2024 00:31:25 UTC No. 16520375
>>16520050
Not a strawman, just pointing out how shallow people like you tend to be.
Anonymous at Sun, 22 Dec 2024 00:50:19 UTC No. 16520391
>>16494610
Whis consensus motherfucker?
Goofy ass dumb clown nigger just says stupid shit trying to sound intelligent.
Also pEt of the cancel culture dei movement agenda to remove identity of white Caucasian scientists from the history of science so dumb niggers puppets can appropriate the credit for scientific knowledge
Anonymous at Sun, 22 Dec 2024 00:56:31 UTC No. 16520396
>>16498803
consensus means priors. consensus opens doors to new research even if subsequently the research fails to establish new priors
Learn your fucking Latin and then get back to us
>a priori
Anonymous at Sun, 22 Dec 2024 16:12:40 UTC No. 16520896
>>16514279
Savory is a whack job
Anonymous at Sun, 22 Dec 2024 21:03:19 UTC No. 16521156
>>16520896
he is a famously successful scientist and you are a nobody, thats why he upsets you, because you're envious of him
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Dec 2024 15:19:49 UTC No. 16522759
No, seriously, I really do wonder how Neil would react to a UFO landing in front of him with a little green alien walking out
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Dec 2024 00:33:27 UTC No. 16523178
>>16498786
no he's talking about how Einstein personally owned a bunch of nukes.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Dec 2024 01:07:52 UTC No. 16523194
>>16522470
this is the extent of knowledge he acquired getting a phd in astonomy
Anonymous at Thu, 26 Dec 2024 04:20:56 UTC No. 16524073
>>16521156
He is a movie theater manager
Anonymous at Fri, 27 Dec 2024 03:53:36 UTC No. 16524821
>>16524073
you're confusing savory & tyson
as far as i know allan savory never managed a movie theater
Anonymous at Fri, 27 Dec 2024 03:56:28 UTC No. 16524822
>>16499341
It's literally so easy to fix we could do it with current technology and half of one year of the military budget by buying current day price rocket trips and current day price aluminum foil. This is the least efficient method of forming a solar shade and is entirely within our capacity.
Anonymous at Fri, 27 Dec 2024 09:51:07 UTC No. 16525032
>>16495417
>If you only trust what's popular, you'll miss breakthroughs
Missing breakthroughs is literally not a fucking issue unless you're a research scientist. Ultimately trusting what is popular is safer and wiser. For every actual fucking breakthrough that improves society, there's a thousand discoveries that at best amount to nothing and at worst fucking kill the first people to get involved in that shit before it's banned or the kinks get worked out. Every bottle of snake oil and tinfoil theory was some dipshit's "breakthrough" in the first place.
And if you ARE a research scientist, you should be capable of fucking checking claims found in breakthroughs and building consensus for them. Remember, ultimately being right doesn't fucking matter if you can't convince others you're right. The people that make cutting edge discoveries can't change jack shit on their own.
Remember Copernicus and Mendel both ended up basically fucking ignored until other people checked and propagated their shit.
tl;dr Shut the fuck up and stay in your fucking lane. Leave science to the scientists and trust the science.
Anonymous at Fri, 27 Dec 2024 12:00:56 UTC No. 16525131
>>16495417
Finally, a good post on this shithole of a website.
Anonymous at Fri, 27 Dec 2024 21:47:03 UTC No. 16525556
>>16525032
>Copernicus … ended up basically fucking ignored
>OMG THIS IS SO UNFAIR
he didn't publish his ideas, they were published posthumously. he chose not to publish because he valued his sinecure more than his ideas
and now you're getting angry and upset over a nonexistent injustice that you invented in your tiny little ignorant head.
and his ideas about circular orbits and heliocentrism were all wrong.
Anonymous at Fri, 27 Dec 2024 22:07:07 UTC No. 16525583
>>16498786
>pretending the pencil pusher deserves recognition
Anonymous at Fri, 27 Dec 2024 22:08:02 UTC No. 16525584
>>16525556
>and now you're getting angry and upset over a nonexistent injustice
I literally didn't mention an injustice.
Anonymous at Fri, 27 Dec 2024 22:45:10 UTC No. 16525648
>>16525556
>>16525584
Also Copernicus's work was published before his death. Stop getting your info from hallucinating AI.
Anonymous at Sat, 28 Dec 2024 02:33:11 UTC No. 16525875
>>16509463
This guy independently proved climate change over his lifetime doing exactly what you suggest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIU