/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6912785
>Dawkin tier atheists
I seriously doubt the question means much to Dawkins
He has a job mocking other's traditions and culture in a snide self-important bitch-like way and his audience shares the bullshit feeling of superiority. It's the same feeling some religious sects promote and it is done t out of the same emotional need.
The Church of Dawkins is an embarrassment to other rationalists just like the judgmental Baptists are an embarrassment to other Christians.

>>6834197
>as an actual research scientist he is nothing
Why would this matter?
Popularizing science is a job for show biz, not science. Sure it's cool when the presenter is an actual scientist but it's not important any more than it's important that an action/adventure movie actor be a real martial artist.
Gould was a real scientist and a so-so popularizer.
Dawkins is a poor scientist and a good popularizer
Asimov was a great writer and a so-so scientist.
Chuck Norris is a great martial artist and a shitty actor.
Get where I'm Going with this?

>>6805569
Oh, you like those sad, twisted emotional train wrecks who get a BS at age 14?
Yeah, that shit is so sad and depressing.
Sorry, people who are 9 feet tall have heart problems and people with IQs over 180 have neurological issues.
It would be great if your childish fantasy was real but there are those pesky laws of science in the way.

>>6765467
That chart shows very clear climate change. It looks like at least .5 degrees C over the last 100 years.
You do realize that a change of say 1 or 1.5 degrees would mean growing bananas in Canada and complete changes in weather patterns that would lead to a mass extinction event don't you?