/sci/ - Science & Math

>>4080013
we have this thread on a biweekly basis. look it up in the archives.

here's a short list of reasons:
1) proven lower GRE scores than physicists/chemists and engineers
2) proven lower IQ than physicists/chemists and engineers
3) statistically higher belief in a deity
4) not classified as a "fundamental science"
5) mock/make fun of physicists
6) call physicists egotistical for considering physics to be the "master of all sciences" (which, we don't)
7) claim that physicists/chemists do not know shit about biology
8) vanilla biology is route memorization
9) little to absolutely no mathematics involved in fundamental models
10) models which do involve mathematics are repeatedly violated in almost every experimental biological system
11) models are never "set in stone" - you don't see newton's laws of motion change on a daily basis and see people flying off the face of the earth in their underpants
12) biologists have a strong case of 'physics envy' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy)), which is even evident in this thread.
13) biologists usually take modified mathematics/physical science courses that are less rigorous because they are either too lazy or incapable of doing proofs

---

under this basis, we solely declare vanilla biology on the rank of the soft sciences.

(sources to any of these provided upon request - this isn't at all trolling)

>more than 3 spatial dimensions