/sci/ - Science & Math

>>2807676
>RAMs

lol....

>>2807613
"The reasons Macs are more expensive, is because they are much more powerful than the average PC laptop."

you'd best be trolling.

pic related.

macs are usable for some things, much in the same argument as notepad vs. word.

the question is, which can do more? which will meet all your needs and then some?

windows is many times better than macs for the vast majority of things. macs just look pretty. if you want a good, decent computer without a ridiculous price tag, get a windows PC.

as for linux, get back to em when you dont have to follow a fucking walkthrough to make it compatible with USBs.

also, games.

macs are absolute pieces of shit.

just get yourself a laptop with a windows OS.

they are considerably cheaper and many times better,

>>2799506
oh please, read their "table 11" at the end. it is so full of opinion.

on top of this, they even concede that animal protein is required to achieve a proper balance:

problem: "Plant proteins alone are not sufficient to achieve an adequate diet (protein intake)"

their answer: " The intakes and balance of intakes of indispensable amino acids and nitrogen are crucial and can be adequately met from plant or plant and animal source"

>or plant and animal
>plant and animal
>need meat to get the right amount of proteins.

heck, read through the fucking article. they have to invoke the use of genetically modified crops.

"we compare the amino acid composition of common hybrid and high-lysine maize and have calculated the PDCAAS for these different cultivars. The prediction is that the nutritional value of the high-lysine variety is superior to that of the hybrid maize and this has been confirmed in metabolic studies in children, as summarized by Bressani"

they then go on to admit that not only do you have to use highly regulated diets in order to get the right amount of nutritional intake, but that it requires a mixture of different plants that must be taken at specific ratios.

then comes the best part:

"The latter assay seriously underestimates the nutritional quality of the soy isolate for children and adults."

they literally ignored their own results. they just said "well, other people think that soy is good, therefore it is and we will ignore this data".

i have never seen a paper dripping with as much bias as that one is.

"protein" is a term that is misunderstood. in cell biology, yes, it is an amino acid chain, but this does not give an indication of the size nor composition of the protein itself.

in nutrition, they should really be saying "amino acids" instead of proteins. some of the amino acids can be manufactures by the body, others cannot.

plants contain very little in the way of amino acids that are useful for the body, and even then, they do not contain much protein at all.

the majority of plant material is actually cellulose, a glucose chain that is not readily broken down in the human digestive track.

this is why meat is important. muscle contains vast amount of protein, in the same proportion (roughly) as what is needed by the body. this makes it perfect for a healthy diet.

>>2757221
>you leanr this is high-school biology

"you learn this in high school biology".

lol, typo central today.

>>2757208
>why do you write F+M and M+F as separate terms?

because these are both possibilities. fuck... you leanr this is high-school biology, when learning basic genetics.

>>2757199
lolwut?

no, its very clear.

wikipedia has a very good explanation of the paradox:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_or_Girl_paradox

there are two answers.

one is 1/2, the other is 1/3.

it depends on assumptions as to which is actually correct.

the answer is that they are both hipster faggots who should be euthanized.

omg, ffs, yes.

lrn2centreofgravity

>>2738565
nice try troll.

"too many people are providing arguments against me, must be one guy pretending to be everyone".

>>2738484
yay, modern day deformed children are still raised.

you obviously have no idea about ancient times. heck, even a few thousand years ago, we still had people regularly killing newborn children outright if it had any deformity at all.

>>2738425
>>2738450
they DO look different. ffs, even when you look at hybrid animals, they appear as a mix of the two parents.

look at the pic in OPs photo. if a child looked like a mixture of that and a human, it would look so far removed from being that it isnt funny.

if you think a child between THAT and a human would look anything liek a human, you are an idiot.

>>2738451
precisely. in his own video, the guy makes claims that we feel so scared at night because we were hunted by neanderthals during the night.

if neanderthals were truly as horrific to us as he makes them out to be, a child between the two species would not only look different, but would have features that clearly link it to the superpredators that were, apparently, EATING us.

>>2738414
i know that, but these idiots are claiming that it DEFINITELY came from rape because this idiot said so.

in truth, we dont even know that we were even fighting. all we know is that neanderthals became extinct. it could very well have been climate changes, or competition that drove them to extinction.

to go so far as to make so many assumptions about the naenderthal-cro magnon interactions is just silly.

the evidence shows that neanderthals were remarkably similar to humans, and that some interbreeding occured.

that is all.

>>2738405
>implying you werent saying they bear an extreme resemblence, enough to be raised as a human.

>>2738381
>implying they would look identical to human-human offspring

>>2738370
saying that something is a "strong possibility" IS an opinion.

cite a source that says it is highly probable that it happened. show me statistics.

>>2738362
>strong possibility
>opinion

>>2738308
>Otherwise we'd have a lot more neanderthal traits (no one would kill the babies if it was made with consensual love) and there would be a cultural exchange

we do have neanderthal DNA from interbreeding. no one said it was COMMON for interbreeding, just that it did happen.

again, all of this is just assertion. there is no evidence to show that neanderthals were raping humans.

your argument is based entirely on "it could have happened". you have proved nothing.

>>2738295
thats not evidence, thats opinion.

showing that its POSSIBLE, and that something happened are two different things.

i could easily claim that african men are raping middle eastern women en masse, and i can show you that it is possible too.

does that mean that it is happening?

what you are trying to argue is unfalsifiable. i could never prove that it didnt happen, in the same way i cannot prove that russels teapot doesnt exist.

it is up to you to prove that they did rape women, in large numbers.

until then, it is a baseless assertion. nothing more.

>>2738298
yes.

>>2738287
nah, i think its just a crackpot who saw he could make a number of strawmen and wild accusations, and then make money selling books.

>>2738278
fullretard.jpg.

large eyes do not automatically means reflective retinas.

seriously....