/sci/ - Science & Math

>What's your major?
>Engineering
>Oh you fix cars?
Proper response is "Professional Male Fellatio Performer".

Also, haven't seen a thread like this in a while. Misunderstood majors thread.

>>4691335
>I can do anything
>lguskghdskghdsvhsd
>youre not omnipotent
Whats the problem here.
There was never something to do.

>2012
>not drinking distilled/ reverse osmosis filtered water
> I seriously hope you guys don't do this

>>4336140
Different anon but...
>Think for a moment, what method do you think exposed these flaws?

No, YOU think for a moment. How would someone go about disproving the effectiveness scientific method in the first place? The fact of the matter is that the only proof you'd accept is scientific proof in the first place, and nothing other than that matters. Your thought process is as follows.

>If it succeeds, it's worth listening to
>If it's not scientific, it's not worth listening to
>Therefore, if it succeeds, it must be scientific

You have completely convinced yourself that science=success to the point where even the distinct failures of science are considered successful just by being pointed out. Seriously, man. Think about it.

These drugs were tested using the scientific method alone. The testing was rigorous and done over and over again. Yet the drugs were failing.

A sane person would say "They should use a different method."
You say "Obviously, the scientific method worked because they found out they were wrong nearly a decade later."

Trust me. It doesn't take science to realize they fucked up.

>>4297199

Social Dynamics /fit/izen here.

>"Hey, how's it going? You should let me buy you a drink."
She'll take the drink and walk off. She has no investment in you, and you're already fawning over her.
>Ask girl questions about herself.
There is no easier way to lose a girl's interest than giving her the interview.
>At the very least, feign interest.
Don't pretend to be interested. Legitimately not be interested in her. Be interested in yourself until she starts showing you that you should be interested in her, to which you can reward her with some attention.
>???
Replace "???" with "build comfort" (assuming you've already built attraction)
>Profit
If by "profit" you mean, "have sex", then yes.

>>4257961
Gattaca supports the deluded belief that anyone with the smallest defect is essentially eradicated from the system, and therefore since certain great people in the past had minor defects we would be eradicating great people in the process. Except for the minor fact that the argument is complete bullshit, it's a good argument.

Under eugenics, we'd still have Einstein's and Leibniz's and so on, they just would be even better versions. There seems to be a faulty notion that you have to be autistic to be smart. Which isn't true, logically or empirically. It is just a common occurrence. A more rare occurrence is a emotionally and mentally stable intelligent person. What eugenics will do is increase the genetic pool of those type of people. So while we won't have Einstein's, per se, we'll have something more akin to Tony Stark.

Another idiotic assumption in his, and apparently other's in this thread, is that eugenics is some kind of blind automaton that cannot be controlled. We can easily implement a system where by slow performers can be noted in their possible potential and only temporarily not allowed to breed (reversible vasectomies and other types of male birth control are quickly advancing). It's not hard to develop a system that wouldn't screw over anybody who was less than perfect. But really, why would you want to? Personally, I'd rather have the ubermensch option. Smart, attractive, sociable humans everywhere.

You fags are retarded, you're focusing on Ron Paul's flaws while failing to realize he's the lesser of (~6) evils.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_solution_fallacy#Perfect_solution_fallacy

Doesn't really matter though because I'm going to vote for Obama and he's going to get re-elected anyway.

I've just starting learning programming (python) and I am interested in how practical it is to use to program a virus.
I also want to know if there are any resources or whatnot I could use to get me started on programming viruses.

Your all missing the point. Cigarettes are inherently cool. They will always be cool. And you know why? Because they cause cancer and death. Thats right. Smoking projects to the world that you don't give two fucks about dying. See I'm inhaling this carcinogenic, I don't give a fuck motherfucker. Remember, bitches are biologically drawn to the "risk taker."

The other thing is the human obsession with fire. Smoking is about the most intimate contact with fire you can have. Fire mesmerizes humans.

>sexy
>pony
>weed

>>3742408
Examining Zeno's paradox here explains why things can be made of infinite parts. An infinite series can add to a finite sum if the terms become successively smaller.
eg: 1/1+1/3+1/6+1/10+1/15...(forever) = 2
In this way 'visible matter' can be made of successively smaller parts.

>>3722991

Yes. What kind of monumental idiot would ADOVCATE dygenic policies.

>inb4 IQ isn't genetic

"Our results unequivocally confirm that a substantial proportion of individual differences in human intelligence is due to genetic variation, and are consistent with many genes of small effects underlying the additive genetic influences on intelligence."

"Genetic influences on brain morphology and IQ are well studied. A
variety of sophisticated brain-mapping approaches relating genetic in-
fluences on brain structure and intelligence establishes a regional distribution for this relationship that is consistent with behavioral studies. We
highlight those studies that illustrate the complex cortical patterns associated with measures of cognitive ability. A measure of cognitive ability,
known as g, has been shown highly heritable across many studies. We
argue that these genetic links are partly mediated by brain structure
that is likewise under strong genetic control."

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21826061

www.loni.ucla.edu/~thompson/PDF/TT_ARN05.pdf

>>3606478
I believe you have forgotten about the part where the brain's complexity of neurons can increase, without it strictly getting bigger.

Think of it this way. The form factor for SATAII hdd's havent really changed, but by god, the rising amount of storage capacity we have been able to pack in there simply by making the storage platters thinner, closer together, and being able to put more in that little box is staggering.

So until we find some sort of finishing line as to how small something can get before the act of recording information is the same size as said small thing (imagine a pencil lead the size of an A4 sheet, and unable to get any smaller) I'd say it's pretty limitless.

You would see an inverted exponential curve as to how much more information could be stored, vs how much has already been learned.

>>3421316

That's clearly bullshit because up until like the 11th century or something everyone thought the heart was responsible for thought and the container of the "soul".

>implying Luna ceases existing when nobody looks at it

cogito ergo non sum, bro

>>3223786
>>3223990
>>3234119

http://xkcd.com/808/

assuming no breaks that makes 1 page every 36 seconds. For twelve hours straight. Nope, it did not happen.

>>3065893

Antimatter has the same mass as regular matter; only the charge is reversed. It is affected by gravity the same way. You're either a troll, or were trolled by some people claiming to be from CERN.

>>2981701
>webster

>cold fusion

bitches don't know about my theory of computation

>>2871058
>implying the big bang was a explosion
>implying there wasn't light before stars formed
>implying vague bullshit can't be made to describe anything

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQECrcZs6Wc&feature=player_embedded

Can you see it?

>>2661054

>doesn't know what a polygon is