/sci/ - Science & Math

should the US government continue to supply massive funding to quantum computing / quantum cryptography? i think not. it’s a huge waste. they should just use the money to give grad students a raise, instead

why does /sci/ have an infestation of science deniers lately? is election year the main cause for plentiful anti-science anons lately?

>>11941364
DIGITAL! WHAT IS DIGITAL???

>>11935414
NOOO MCDONALDS IS ESSENTIAL

>>11420523
>YEAH FUCK LIBTARDS I STARE AT THE SUN FUCK THOSE SCIENCE NERDS
kek so funny i vote for trump because he is dumb and trolls libtards by liking soiience!!!!! me patriotic murkan!

what explains the sudden drop of the quality on /sci/? there are like 0 good science or math threads right now. is it the flood of coronavirus tourists?

things we should be discussing but aren’t:
>dark energy and string theory/KKLT (lisa randall posted a paper like yesterday)
>john ellis still loving SUSY (an interview a few days ago)
>dark energy and recent “refutation” papers
>quantum supremacy and how the name is racist
>lee smolin taking money from epstein
>chanda prescott’s-weinstein telling us string theory is bad because of “white empiricism”
>undergrads continue to be insufferable brainlets

>>11100913
NUH UH TRUMP SMART

>>11006949
fucking kek that is a real good one, never saw it before.

here is one i collected

>>10884980
>Look, having nuclear — my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart — you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world — it’s true! — but when you’re a conservative Republican they try — oh, do they do a number — that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune — you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged — but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me — it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are — nuclear is so powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right, who would have thought?

>>10772497
you're accusing me of believing retarded shit? you're the one arguing that taking hallucinogens lets you perceive "true reality".

and i hope you are posting that trump ironically. dude is straight-edge as fuck, doesn't even drink, and it completely close-minded even to the level of thinking "digital" is bad. pic related

>checkmate climate cucks

trump’s orders

if you were the nephew of John G Trump, would you use the argument of "very good genes" to claim that you are scientifically literate? like about how nucular is umportant?

>>10612515

>>10523544
womp womp

>Look, having nuclear — my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart — you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world — it’s true! — but when you’re a conservative Republican they try — oh, do they do a number — that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune — you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged — but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me — it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are — nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right, who would have thought?

Terrific thread!