/sci/ - Science & Math

Highest % of redditors.

Do you have a source on that?

Source?

A source. I need a source.

Sorry, I mean I need a source that explicitly states your argument. This is just tangential to the discussion.

No, you can't make inferences and observations from the sources you've gathered. Any additional comments from you MUST be a subset of the information from the sources you've gathered. You can't make normative statements from empirical evidence.

You still haven't provided me a valid source yet.

Nope, still haven't.

>Prove it.

>yeah bro, abrasion doesn't damage your teeth, I mean what kind of conspiracy theorists would you need to be to think that.

>>10815339
Do you have a source on that?

Source?

A source. I need a source.

Sorry, I mean I need a source that explicitly states your argument. This is just tangential to the discussion.

No, you can't make inferences and observations from the sources you've gathered. Any additional comments from you MUST be a subset of the information from the sources you've gathered.

You can't make normative statements from empirical evidence.

Do you have a degree in that field?

A college degree? In that field?

Then your arguments are invalid.

No, it doesn't matter how close those data points are correlated. Correlation does not equal causation.

Correlation does not equal causation.

CORRELATION. DOES. NOT. EQUAL. CAUSATION.

You still haven't provided me a valid source yet.

Nope, still haven't.

>>10803291
Do you have a source on that?

Source?

A source. I need a source.

Sorry, I mean I need a source that explicitly states your argument. This is just tangential to the discussion.

No, you can't make inferences and observations from the sources you've gathered. Any additional comments from you MUST be a subset of the information from the sources you've gathered. You can't make normative statements from empirical evidence.

Do you have a degree in that field? A college degree? In that field? Then your arguments are invalid. No, it doesn't matter how close those data points are correlated. Correlation does not equal causation.

Correlation does not equal causation.

CORRELATION. DOES. NOT. EQUAL. CAUSATION.

You still haven't provided me a valid source yet.

Nope, still haven't.

>>10803288
>Do you have a source on that?

>Source?

>A source. I need a source.

>Sorry, I mean I need a source that explicitly states your argument. This is just tangential to the discussion.

>No, you can't make inferences and observations from the sources you've gathered. Any additional comments from you MUST be a subset of the information from the sources you've gathered. You can't make normative statements from empirical evidence.

>Do you have a degree in that field? A college degree? In that field? Then your arguments are invalid. No, it doesn't matter how close those data points are correlated. Correlation does not equal causation.

>Correlation does not equal causation.

>CORRELATION. DOES. NOT. EQUAL. CAUSATION.

>You still haven't provided me a valid source yet.

>Nope, still haven't.

Beer contains phytoestrogens and has a feminizing effect. That's why most beer drinkers have fat faces that lack any distinction, have beer guts, and in general are unpleasant moody soi bois. Ethanol is not really a /sci/ beverage give its toxicity but if you must drink, drink a hard liquor like whisky, in low doses as Tesla did, preferably with a side of water.