/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11094491
>But pointing out your lack of ability to provide evidence and respond to it is very important.
you dont have evidence either though

>But you refuse to, because you DOGMATICALLY reject it without any thought
then man up and post proof.. i think you hvaent read the article and youre just bluffing

>You constantly bring up correlation as if it counters AGW
libtard black or white thinking.. im showing there is a shade of gray where humans cause global warming and so do other things

>What is it telling?
that the propaganda avoids the sun

>That's rich.
ur a fuckin fgt m8

>First you claimed scientists are dishonest,
no only certain kinds of scientists

>Failing to provide evidence
how about the "muh 97 percent lie" and google and youtube's admission they try to dissuade people stumbling on conspiracy theories which they automatically assume any skepticism over the prevailing gw narrative and we know that scientists are not perfect androids and they are influenced by cultural consensus as they are influenced by their peers

see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satoshi_Kanazawa
>Kanazawa's comments and research on race and intelligence, health and intelligence, multiculturalism, and the relationship between physical attractiveness and intelligence have led to condemnation from observers and colleagues. He attributes this to political correctness and censorship,[3] while his critics have described his claims as pseudoscientific[4][5] and racist.[

>black women are objectively less attractive than women of other races, he was dismissed from writing for Psychology Today, and his employer, the London School of Economics, prohibited him from publishing in non-peer-reviewed outlets for 12 months.[8] A group of 68 evolutionary psychologists issued an open letter titled "Kanazawa's bad science does not represent evolutionary psychology" rejecting his views,[9] and an article on the same theme was published by 35 academics in American Psychologist