/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10983572

>>10213804
good one, made me look
have a (You)

>>10038907
>only prerequisites were "high school mathematics and basic programming in Python/ R/ Matlab".
Lmao and they threw you into stochastic processes and markov chains??? Must be a pretty nice school, if they believed you would swim in that kind of sink-or-swim setting

>>9834988
>you can't do better than 50% accuracy when predicting the result of a single coin flip
>how can you POSSIBLY predict the net result of a million coin flips?

>>9735775
nothing in [5] actually disproves the claim
[6] is full of pseudoscientists and outright lies.
>Davide Piffer
Not only does he publish in stormfag pseudoscience journals (the twice-quoted paper is from fucking Mankind Quarterly, which is literally supported by grants from an organization whose stated goal is to support white supremacists; I wonder why you omitted the journal title from those citations?), he actually thinks he has ESP and psychokinesis powers.
>Wang and Su
they're legitimate researchers. unfortunately, the alleged quote appears NOWHERE in the cited paper, and its claims are entirely unsupported by the paper. when stormfags can't win an argument, they just resort to making shit up.
https://academic.oup.com/hmg/article/13/11/1131/699073
>Hardy
nothing wrong with this paper either, but it too doesn't actually say any of what the stormfag graphic says. also, there's literally no evidence to support Penrose's conjecture; it's basically just advanced autism at this point.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/413b/a8d09f208aa2ae7b1cfb3aa22e78c67deea0.pdf
>Desrivieres
This paper also says something entirely different from what the graphic does. Seeing a pattern yet?
https://www.nature.com/articles/mp2013197
>Weiss
this paper also is published in the literal stormfag journal Mankind Quarterly. surprisingly enough, the journal title was left off of this one as well; I wonder why?
>Thomas
>Mekei-Bobrov
aaand nothing in these papers actually supports the claim of the graphic.

there you have it. delusional pseudoscientists publishing in a journal that literally gets its funding from overt white supremacists, and lies about what actual scientists have said.
what was your point in posting this, anyway?

>>9618865
not an argument
(but a very nice strawman)

>>9551835
obvious /pol/ falseflag
aaand right on schedule:
>>9553280
>>9553282
>>9553287
>>9553289
>>9553291
>>9553293
>>9553297
take your (You) and get out of here

>>9355201
>Stress test your ability to memorize and regurgitate bullshit.
in middle school, maybe. those of us who pursue higher education move beyond this. if you had actually gone to college, or even finished high school, you'd understand this.
>It's the opposite of being blind, you have to factor in everything before making conclusions
then why are you putting absolute faith in what others tell you about subjects that you, by your own admission, have no actual experience with?
>Big Bang is simple
to people who have no idea what it is, sure.
>neither are correct in my opinion
your opinion is worthless on this matter, since it's derived from delusional conjecture rather than evidence.
>The books you are forced to read at school/university are certainly suspect.
Please tell my why "How to Build a Habitable Planet", by Stephen Langmuir and Wally Broecker, is suspect. Why should I automatically distrust the authors?
>I'm saying equations aren't science.
you said that ALL equations violate the Scientific Method. you said that using math as part of science makes it nonscientific.

this is about the level of delusional idiocy I expect of someone who think that numbers don't real.

>>8879887
too slow, you're the SIXTH reply

@8848214

Your /pol/ is showing anon, I cant give you more (You)'s but heres a pseudo - you so you dont leave empty handed.

Come on, dont shit other boards, specially this place.

Just go back, go on.

>>8835863
u did it op

@8822853

You ignored everything that anon posted. And even refused to address his points.

You are just memeing and / or dont have any idea of what you are talking about.

Here have a pseudo (You)

>>8671214
>methane
>a make believe problem
o I am laffin

>new age war on CO2 and branding of it as some sort of pollutant (ironic since it is critical to life on this planet)
phosphate is also critical to life on this planet and yet it can also be a dangerous pollutant. same with nitrate and ozone, to name a few.

>Almost any activity can and eventually will be targeted for 'central control' and this is no different than any religion or cult that wants absolute authority over all aspects of their subjects. AGW is a religion and in my opinion the most terrifying cult yet invented due to the sheer scope of its agenda.
>being this paranoid and autismal
nothing personnel kid

>>8653814
>if you don't think climatology is some kind of Rothschild meme you must also subscribe to these other mutually contradictory ideologies that I don't like
look, this sort of shit is why it's so easy to spot the /pol/esmoker on /sci/: they unironically believe that there is a massive conspiracy to do something vague and nebulous involving taking over the world and making anime illegal. and when anyone disagrees with their sainted opinions in any single way (much less posts evidence rebutting those opinions), that immediately means they must be part of the conspiracy.
which makes this:
>Thats why they call 99% of people they see here /pol/ and thats why everyone is their enemy.
hilariously ironic. projecting much, friendo?
(notice also that when you tell someone to go to reddit or tumblr, they usually just go "yeah whatever". but when you tell someone to go back to /pol/ they almost invariably flip the fuck out. I guess it hits a nerve.)

you'll notice that there's shitposting and argument in all sorts of threads here on /sci/, and nobody gets told to go back to /pol/ in most of them. it's only when you guys start going on with the
>climatology is a meme
>blacks are genetically inferior
>women are subhuman
bullshit that you're told to take it back where you belong.

>>8647752
>>opinion

Literally every week. You'd have to be pretty stupid to pay all that tuition money and not take advantage of every opportunity you can to get the highest grades possible/possibly do research in undergrad if a professor likes you. Here's your (You) though.

>>8331430