/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16032113
Here's your (You), bodhi, you can start namefagging again now

>>14828011
Funny how there isn't a single cgi picture of space that look like pictures taken with telescopes

>>14572708
>replying YWNBAW to a guy with a schlong twice as long as yours
End yourself.

>>11853930
>>N-95s filter over 95% of particles down to 7 nm. SARS-CoV-2 is 120 nm in diameter.
>*Up to 120 nm in diameter.
*approximately

>And yes a certain percentage will be filtered, just as a screen door will hold back a certain percentage of water on a submarine.
more like a screen door holding back a certain percentage of basketballs.

the main reason masks leak is that they aren't airtight

>>11750345
>the math and design is the easy part.
I love how businessmen unironically believe they're the smart ones.

>>11283794
>if you stray too far from the conventional wisdom of peer reviewed academic "science" then you'll be ostracized from the so-called academic community, just like in galileo's day.
You might have a point if Galileo's findings had ultimately been rejected. However, they are now accepted. Thus, you have only proven that "the conventional wisdom of peer reviewed academic science" is indeed flexible and capable of self-reflection and correction.

>>11252318
Contradictions due to playing fast and loose with the concepts of "species" and "race"

>phenotype and behavior determines species
Men and women have distinct phenotypes and behaviors.
Tall and short people have distinct phenotypes and behaviors.
Are they different species?

>ability to interbreed
Completely irrelevant. For example, men cannot interbreed with men, and women can't interbreed with women. Thus, two sisters wouldn't be the same species, but are the same species as any human male on the planet. Obviously this makes no sense.

You can go back now.

>>11216070
>IQ is the best predictor
>it just means it is good at making predictions
even if we take you at your word (really, wealth is a better predictor of success), "best" doesn't imply "good" in the first place

some fucking guys in sub saharan africa invented a spaceship to go to the moon, it was specifically designed to go to the moon, and it was the very best they had.
guess what? it was still shit.
that's what IQ is like. designed for the job, supposedly the best we have... and still shit.

>>11216150
being short is correlated with type 2 diabetes risk, i guess your doctor can get a general idea of your type 2 diabetes risk by measuring your height?

>>11201070
>this paper contradicts those papers
How embarrassing. Your paper is actually cited as supportive research by the paper in the first post you quoted.

If you actually read it you'll see it doesn't actually help your case.

From its discussion:
>The results do not negate conclusions from previous research (e.g., Hodson & Busseri, 2012; Onraet et al., 2015), but rather replicate and extend the original findings. The results are supportive of claims that cognitive ability predicts prejudice and that socially conservative views are a mediator—but with the important caveat that the association between low cognitive ability and prejudice is bounded by the type of group.
>Lower cognitive ability is associated with prejudice, but only toward a specific subset of possible groups in society; toward other groups, the relationship disappears or even reverses itself.
As they clearly state, their study doesn't contradict the findings of the other papers (e.g., bigots are low IQ). Those correlations are NOT erased.
They're only saying to be careful about wholesale equating prejudice with stupidity, because other prejudices exist that aren't predicted by cognitive ability.

They conclude:
>From our perspective, the work presented here simultaneously confirms past work while expanding on it, showing that the cognitive ability–prejudice association depends on features of the target group, in particular the groups’ perceived ideology and level of choice in group membership.
Note well: "perceived ideology" and "level of choice in group membership"
This is how smart Christians and athiests justify prejudice against each other, or how the rich can be prejudiced against the working class.
Thus the presence of prejudice itself says little about cognitive ability; we must consider the context and reasons as well.
That /pol/tards and stormniggers can accept piss-poor reasoning is consistent with the correlation between low IQ and racial prejudice.

>>11128630
>except that we can expect this study to be debunked just like that one.
different authors
different methodology
different claim

sorry, not logical
>>>/pol/

>>11099392
you will respond to his post to say that he failed to predict your next action.

>>11088043
>not wanting to be constantly harangued by police is controversial and unreasonable
the actual state of american cuckolds

>you know there are already a lot of black cops, who probably discriminate just as much if not more than white cops do.
yes, there are black brainlets too, i think anyone will agree

>>10728393
>>10728343
>if you literally took 10 minutes to read a wikipedia article on logic
>axioms are still a foundational requirement of argument and dipshits repeatedly questioning axioms does not make an argument invalid.
Hi brainlet, get your own shit straight before you try to fix anyone else's. Like take your own advice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom
>As used in mathematics, the term axiom is used in two related but distinguishable senses: "logical axioms" and "non-logical axioms"...
>When used in the latter sense, "axiom", "postulate", and "assumption" may be used interchangeably. In general, a non-logical axiom is not a self-evident truth, but rather a formal logical expression used in deduction
Hmm.
I guess just saying "it's an axiom!!!1" doesn't save you from having to defend a retarded argument.

>>10619992
one has a well-understood causal mechanism
one doesn't

>>10493686
>An IQ thread died to discuss a scientific find with staggering implications that would likely lead to mass suicide as creationists fail to cope
stay mad cucklord

>>10483094
>IQ is the strongest statistical correlation in all of psychology and sociology.
meaningless statement.
the important question is whether or not it is adequate, period.
my car is the fastest machine i own. that doesn't mean it can get me to the moon.

>>10454255
>Where did I assert that?
You conditionally asserted it here >>10450242
>If by "witness are correct 80% of the time when making such statements" they mean the witness is correct 80% of the time they say they saw a blue taxi then the answer is 80% and the other information given is unnecessary.

I'm keeping this for myself.

>>10149609
It couldn't come soon enough, Stacey. Keep fondling chad's cock.
Pic related is you

>>10101887
>>10101886
Not OP but both of you should work on your English if you really can't read that.

Let U1 & U2 be 2 boxes such that U1 contains 3 white & 2 red balls and U2 contains 1 white ball. A fair coin is tossed.
If heads appear, one ball is drawn at random from U1 and put in U2. If tail appears, 2 balls are drawn at random from U1 and put in U2. Now one ball is drawn from U2.

a) Find probability that ball drawn from U2 is white
b) Given that the ball drawn from U2 is white, find P that head appeared on the coin

>>9921443
I already explained why it's not as simple as that, but do go on

>>9827227
>how about genes which expression are determined by environment?
How about them? If handedness is epigenetic in nature then we should be especially interested in exploring it so we can create more of the superior race to lead us into the next century.

>how about phenotype?
The two phenotypes are left- and right-handed. The left is associated with an increased chance of genius IQ and the right is associated with a higher likelihood of subhumanism.

>genetics is mechanicism
Go find an IQ thread to throw your strawmen at. This thread is reserved for facts and logic, as stated in OP.

>>9772954
Beautiful post, please accept this (You). You earned it.

>>9303399