/sci/ - Science & Math

yes yes yes yes yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees I FUCKING LOVE SOIENCE

>>14972555
chain rule

>>14972555
Science is about the process where no mater what happens as a result of the process you're going to learn something useful.

SCIENCE™ is about a result, where if you don't get the result you wanted or expected then the experiment was useless or needs to be fudged.


With this said, this means Mythbusters is more scientific than some modern SCIENTISTS™

>>14972555
how much you fucking love it

Fuck pear review. By power of my supreme intellect I'm pear reviewing scientific studies myself. I don't need some low IQ acadummic soicucks to tell me whether a study is trustworthy or not.

>>14972642
Which fruit would be more suited for review in your opinion?

Onions science is mostly inside the realm of medicine and social/human studies like psychology and sociology

It usually tries to use the data harvested to make claims about topics it has no right to touch (such as religion and morality)

It takes the shape of people that are just trying to prove a preconcieved idea (studies on transgender people are almost exclusively done by people that believe the current idea of transgenderism and have no intention of ever changing their ideas) and to try to push for an idea (porn is good, multiple sex partners are good, man and women are equal)

when it comes to medicine onions science, it is usually the same thing, just people with preconcieved ideas trying to manipulate experiments to fit a narrative, and then make policy out of the narrative.


Science is beautiful, but unless we keep eachother in check by making sure all the procedures are sound, all the analytics are correct and all of the conclusions are sensible and rigorous, we will keep dealing with this terrible cancer that ruins society and ruins the scientific world.

>>14972555
There is no Science, in the singular. There are sciences. That's how you tell. And anyone who tries to talk about all of them needs their skull bashed in.

>>14972555
>How do you differentiate Science from SCIENCE™?
Funding and conflicts of interest. Even "good" science can be bs if your not looking critically at the data and design.

>>14972647
soience is rampant in physics too. Astronomy is full of it.

>>14972956
yes but when it comes to hard sciences, no amount of philosophy or context manipulation can make you be right, so its not as dangerous to society, its not good either

>>14972995
It can still destroy decades worth of learning if people refuse to acknowledge their theories are wrong.

>>14972956
DARK MATTER IS REAL OKAY GRAVITY DOESN'T EXPLAIN GALAXY ROTATION WHAT DO YOU MEAN GRAVITY COULD BEHAVE LIKE WAVES AHHHHHH-ACK

>>14972647
>Topics it has no right to touch
>religion
>morality
Science has absolutely every right to not just touch but shit all over every cancerous and schizophrenic religious dogma on the planet until we are rid of it entirely.

>>14972623
>SCIENCE™ is about a result, where if you don't get the result you wanted or expected then the experiment was useless or needs to be fudged.

>>14973042
Yeah sounds like what they do in physics and astronomy lol
>wait a sec our calulations and conclusions don't seem to work
>ah well we'll just say it works and our calculations didn't work because of dark matter/energy

>>14972555
I remember like 3-4 years ago those fags were crying about the Amazon going into fire season. Yeah. Good times.

Science: The Selfish Gene
SCIENCE™: Dawkins shilling for mass immigration

>>14973273
regards, idiotfrogs

>>14972555
Science: What people in universities do
SCIENCE™: What the media reports

>>14973273
>until we are rid of it entirely
You remind me a woman who absokutely hated the idea of nations. Wanted zero borders "and like no laws myan..."

You two are of the same flock.

SCIENCE™ is pushing by (((media)))
And surprise! SCIENCE™ is always in favour of THE CURRENT THING™

>>14973315
You forgot the last part :
>we will release nice pictures and a pay to the press to impress normies

Science: The Bell Curve
SCIENCE™: IQ ISNT REAL AHHHHHHHHHHH

>>14972555
Nice trips faggot
>>14972623
>>14972807
>>14973471
This
I worked over a year on a fucking pilot study, just to show the experiment we want to do even makes sense. And that was all on the back of a study my PI did which took 6 years.
Scinece is a slow, painfull process of designing a good experiment where the reasults leave little to interpretation, which definitively reafirms or dsicards a model.
SCIENCE™, is esentually just the general public getting excited by things they don't understand and then building their personality around misread or misunderstood science.

>>14972555
SCIENCE™is just the media filter. It's like asking how you differentiate the spoon and "ooohhhhh here comes the aeroplane" - they're not even remotely the same thing. There is only one science: science.

>>14972623
jackass is more scientific than most of modern SCIENTISTS™

>>14973273
low level reddit post

>>14972623
Rewatching the series it’s actually kind of refreshing the level of rigor they have in it.

>>14973273
You people sure love calling everything schizophrenic don't you?

>>14972555
Science = What /pol/ does
SCIENCE = What twittertrannies do

>>14973273
>Science has absolutely every right
if science will disprove god, right now, no

science is anything that conforms to my preexisting beliefs, soicence is anything that disproves them

>>14972555
by looking how ugly are the wives of the scientists
uglier the wife, better the science
forever alone nerds = maximum science purity

>>14972642
This. They also hide behind jargon and mystique, trying to make thtings more complicatd and convoluted than they actually are.

>>14973809
>Ugly nerd cope
Embaressing. Bitter, forever alone nerds are the ones who are ruining many aspects of science.

>>14973471
>Science: What people in universities do
True at the top research level but a lot of undergeaduate and even graduate level scientific courses are spreading straight up misinformation and Scientific inaccuracies these days.

>>14973845
Are we talking social sciences or natural sciences here?

>>14973684
yeah i love how often they go "we could just assume this is enough proof, BUT"

>>14973886
social are bleeding over into natural

All non-political science is likely to be true, because no one cares to make up lies about it. All political science might be true or wrong, you can’t tell, unless you personally studied that science.

>>14973886
both, in my experience.

Take evolution: In the science, Evolution is a theory about changes: in the Myth (as presented and thought of in the popular mind) it is a fact about improvements. Thus a real scientist like J.B.S. Haldane is at pains to point out that popular ideas of Evolution lay a wholly unjustified emphasis on those changes which haverendered creatures (by human standards) ‘better’ or more interesting. He adds, ‘We are therefore inclined to regard progress as the rule in evolution. Actually it is the exception, and for every case of it there are ten of degeneration.’ But the Myth simply expurgates the ten cases of degeneration. In the popular mind the word ‘Evolution’ conjures up a picture of things moving ‘onward and upwards’, and of nothing else whatsoever. Today, biology departments are teaching evolution from the aspect of it's mythopoetic nature, not it's true scientifc one as legitimate practicing Biologists studied and used to study.

My belief is this: Evolution has proven over the last 50 years to be a pretty poor theory, highly confusing and extremely nuanced to study and trace. In other words: It's one of the hardest sciences to focus and specialize in. So, they decided it would simply be easier to teach it from the mythopoetic aspect since there is no contention and it's easier.

In other words, what >>14973961 said.

>>14972555
SCIENCE™ is what people fucking LOVE!
Science is what people fucking hate.

>>14974100
>because no one cares to make up lies about it.
People lie about results all the time because it's far easier to publish positive results than negative ones.

>>14974184
Depends on the field. Medicine and bio you can get away with a lot of that shit because if someone repeats your experiment and gets a different result you can say "oh well there must be some underlying differences between our samples/environment that we overlooked" and move the fuck on. Physics you can't claim that you measured a new particle or new effect and expect to bullshit your way through it if everyone else gets null results.

>>14972555
true science is 100 years ahead
https://www.reddit.com/r/TechnologyAndAliens/comments/ypzufg/the_space_war/

>>14972555
intelligence

>>14972555
>How do you differentiate Science from
https://absolute0.neocities.org/statepseudoscience.html

>>14972555
evidence and proofs

>>14973273

>>14973029
Which theory is wrong

>>14972555
Any subject relating to psychology/feminism/gender/politics/any articles that dont have Zhang et al as authors

>>14973273
>Religion and Science aren't compatible.

The first academic and scholastic institutions were founded by Christians. The Scientific method can be found both in the Bible, and in Platonist literature. You couldn't even attend Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, etc unless you were a baptised, practicing, Christian until the later 19th/ early 20th century.

Maybe next time, consider if what is about to come out of your mouth (or in this case, fingers), actually has any truth or semblance in historical reality. You may not mark the effects of all the lies you spew, when you lie it's out there forever. And it will always come back to you, in the end. We all answer for our actions eventually.

>>14974614
based

>>14972555
By reading actual papers instead of news articles about papers

>>14974585
General and Special Relativity.

>>14972555
the SCIENCE™ is settled

https://www.brighteon.com/38949ecb-9ec4-4da9-8d11-e1a922e15be9

>>14972566
Underrated

SCIENCE comes from journalists writing in newspapers for normies, science comes from scientific journals written for a scientific audience.

>>14972555
You HAVE to trust SCIENCE™

is it based on authority or evidence
if evidence it's science

>>14976582
The average person can't understand or doesn't have the time to understand the evidence and must take it based on authority. This is where conspiracy theorists and science deniers get their ammunition.

>>14972555
Who's the loudest.

>>14976597
Isn't the evidence authority based on the stochastic dominance of empirical behavior?

>>14976597
>This is where conspiracy theorists and science deniers get their ammunition.
Then maybe you should stop providing it? :^)

>>14976620
What are you trying to say in your goblygook? Because there's several ways I could interpret your statement, but I'd rather give you the opportunity to clarify as I don't want to unintentionally misconstrue what you said?

>>14972555
Science has detailed explanations for phenomena, and accepts people questioning existing observations and explanations.

SCIENCE™ appeals to the authority of the scientific community, tends to refer to scientists as an amorphous group of "experts" rather than pointing to specific scientists and their studies that reinforce a claim, and relies on state and corporate power to suppress those who would ask questions inconvenient to policy makers.

>>14976626
Stop providing what? Papers get published in science and engineering journals. Many of them can be easily accessed. We live in a free society. It's not my fault if some retard journo takes one of my papers, doesn't understand, posts some bullshit article, and then conspiracytards like you latch onto it.

>>14976651
See
>>14976597
Normies can't understand science so they must always appeal to their authority.

>>14976597
Unless you're learning stuff for practical means blindly trusting authority is useless and unscientific, and even when learning stuff for practical means it's a bad idea to do zero investigating yourself

>>14976654
>Stop providing what?
Ammunition to the people who correctly point out that your so-called "scientific" worldview is based on trust in authority.

>>14976668
Then you will simply need to completely disbelief entire scientific fields and subfields because you cannot personally verify their theories, data, and assumptions. You simply don't have the time or ability to learn or understand everything. Your position is untenable and it's contradictory. You fly plates, drive cars, cross bridges, use electricity, and you have never once "questioned their science". I guarantee the only time you have a problem is when it personally contradicts or affects your political or philosophical beliefs in some aspect. You trusted the science every time you got on a plane, drove your car, crossed a bridge, used a lift, bought milk, stood on the floors of a sky rise, etc.

>>14976705
>Then you will simply need to completely disbelief entire scientific fields and subfields because you cannot personally verify their theories, data, and assumptions
Didn't say that, you can trust certain authorities if you want no problem, but trusting authority because they are authority is retarded, you don't actually know it like you know something yourself, thats fine unless you claim you actually know it for sure like many scientism cultists do

>>14976670
What's wrong with trust in authorities if it's validated by real world results? I'm not a biologist or a chemist but I know biologists have produced a lot of tangible discoveries that have benefited me. Most engineers have never done mathematical proofs, but use maths to building bridges that people drive over everyday without ever doing the calculations for static loads and dynamics loads. Your conspiracy fag worldview crumbles with basic questioning.

>>14976733
>What's wrong with trust in authorities
If there's nothing wrong with it, you should make it explicit that you believe what you believe because X and Y said so, rather than because "it's science".

>>14976729
breh, you trusted the science when turning your oven, using your fridge, and using your toilet today. You didn't verify any of that and take it for granted. Right now we are conversing over a bunch of signals and you have never once confirmed that science.

>>14976739
>you trusted the science when turning your oven, using your fridge, and using your toilet today
No, he didn't. He doesn't need to trust any authority to use a fridge.

>>14976776
You implicitly trust the authorities who made the thermodynamics equations that are used for refrigerators, you trusted the material scientists, you trusted the manufacturing engineers, you trusted every single person who worked on designing and manufacturing that fridge and you assumed it would work out of the box without confirming anything yourself independently.

>>14976649
Is what we consider evidence credible because of the frequency/consistency/pervasiveness of similar sensory outputs?

Science is boring and tedious.

SCIENCE(TM) is sexy and comes with pictures of space

>>14972555
Is it acceptable to discuss alternatives to the claim? Is it acceptable to discuss what would make the claim falsifiable?

If not it's a dogma not a science

>>14976787
I don't need to trust anyone to know that a fridge works. I'm happy you keep churning out these mentally ill posts because you're making my point for me that your sort is completely dependent on others to tell them what to think about literally anything.

>>14976810
>I don't need to trust anyone to know that a fridge works
You don't? Why not?

>>14976819
>Why not?
Because I can see for myself that it does. Please refer back to the second part of >>14976810

>>14976821
How can you see yourself?

>>14976739
Retard i said you can believe authority when convenient but don't act like you have the truth

>>14972555
for me, it's the Early Life section

>>14976823
By being in proximity to fridges and observing that they work. Take your meds already.

>>14976656
Authority that can be easily filtered out.
>>14976791

>>14976844
What's a better method of achieving "truth" than the scientific method?

>>14976860
Maybe your observations are wrong? Why are you so sure about your observations? Aristotle thought women had less teeth than men from his observations. What equations, theories, DAQ, data analysis methods did you use to confirm it actually works how you think it does? What alternative hypothesis did you consider? How did you exclude them?

>>14976871
>Maybe your observations are wrong? Why are you so sure about your observations?
If you can't figure out on your own whether or not a fridge works, you probably shouldn't be on the internet without a parent or legal guardian.

>>14976861
Every single person alive appeals to authority because one person cannot know everything. The only difference is that some people don't know it, can't admit it, or refuse to admit it for whatever personal convenience.

>>14976878
Name the equation and experimental methodology you used to confirm that your fridge works as you think it does.

>>14976882
You put your hand in. You feel that it's much colder than ambient temperature. You know it works. Now you do a little experiment for me: take your meds and come back tomorrow. Let's see if they work, too.

>>14976863
authority has nothing to do with the scientific method

>>14976895
So, you're basing it on your subjective feelings and you don't actually have any data. Gotcha, so you don't actually know.
>>14976898
True. But disseminating scientific knowledge does.

>>14976909
>you're basing it on your subjective feelings
Yes. The subjective feeling that it's colder inside the fridge than outside. I'm starting to get a strong impression that you're false-flagging to make soience fans look even more insane than they are.

>>14976913
>The subjective feeling that it's colder inside the fridge than outside.
How do you know? You just admitted that it's subjective. How do you know there are not alternative explanations? Also, how are you defining "cold" and "hot"? What is "cold" and what is "hot"? Cold relative to what? Cold relative to what? What if my cold feels different to your cold? Sounds like you're just uncritically accepting things without doing your own research, bro. You didn't confirm the science.

>>14976880
Appealing to authority is only one particular subcase of one of the branches of the Munchhausen Trilemma: one asserts that something is true because an authority has claimed it to be so. Other kinds of assertion include appealing to the senses (sight, smell, etc.) or to common sense or to "obviousness".

Aside from assertion, one can also resort to circular or infinite justification (although can consider circular justification as a subcase of infinite justification if you "unwrap" the cycle).

That is to say that there are alternatives to appealing to authority, so it's not necessarily the case that every person (or even every justifier) employs appeals to authority.

>>14976927
On the off chance that you're serious, unironically take your meds.

>>14976934
So you haven't actually done any science, engineering, or data analysis and you've just appealed to authority and faith that it works? Gotcha. Thank you for confirming that you have double standards and that your worldview falls apart under minimum scrutiny. I accept your concession. Next.

>>14976871
Hypothesis:
- fridge works

falsifiable mechanism:
- water gets colder when put in fridge

Experiment:
- measure bottle of water with thermostat
- put bottle of water in fridge
- wait 2 hours
- take bottle of water out of fridge
- measure bottle of water with thermostat
- thermostat now lower number

=> hypothesis confirmed

>>14976936
>you've just appealed to authority
You mean the authority of my own senses to tell my that it's colder inside the fridge? lol.

>>14976941
Ummm, sweaty? But how do you know thermostats measure the temperature correctly? Check-mate. Looks like you gotta troost the experts.

>>14972555
I disregard anything that's being used to push a political agenda

>>14976954
>disregard anything that's being used to push a political agenda
Only correct approach.

>>14976941
How do you know your thermostat is accurate or precise? What is its resolution? How do you know you're measuring the true value?
Also, how did you confirm the physical mechanism that affects the temperature of your water? A modern fridge-freezer is build from several scientific disciplines, materials, chemistry, physics to name a few.

>>14976944
Kek, I hope you're in high school. Human senses are one of the easiest things to fool. For example, there's no such thing as "colour". Learn basic optics kiddo. It's possible to feel extremely hot when atmospheric temperature is cold (i.e., close to zero). It's possible to feel cold when the atmospheric temperature is hot.

>>14976961
>How do you know your thermostat is accurate or precise?
Called it: >>14976947. You niggers are uttery predictable.

>>14976909
>>14976927
Please know when to give up, you are grasping at straws here.

The human body and its nervous system is pretty standardised across the population due to a genetic bottleneck a few hundred thousand years ago, meaning the heat information is processed in pretty much the same exact way by every human with quite a small spread in nervous structure or pulse frequency/timing. Unless you want to argue that such a large part of the population has dysfunctional thermal sensors in their hand or dysfunctional nerves leading from the sensors to the brain or has a dysfunctional trigeminal ganglion in their to process the incoming heat information, that it would be impossible for a crowd to distinguish the correct information from the noise, then your arguments are based on nothing but pure sophistry and 'HoW cAn YoU kNoW fOr ReAlZ?!?!!!1!'

>>14976941
Also, you'd use a thermometer not a thermostat to measure temp, you silly /pol/child

>>14976970
>Human senses are one of the easiest things to fool.
Do you often find yourself confused about whether it's hot or cold?

>there's no such thing as "colour".
Pic related.

>>14976981
>The human body and its nervous system is pretty standardised across the population due to a genetic bottleneck a few hundred thousand years ago, meaning the heat information is processed in pretty much the same exact way by every human with quite a small spread in nervous structure or pulse frequency/timing.
How did you confirm this?

>>14976989
With my dick

>>14976985
>Do you often find yourself confused about whether it's hot or cold?
Spoken like someone who's never actually been cold.

>>14976993
You're a hermaphrodite, you don't have one.
>>14976985
So, you're arguing that feelings determine truth? Your feelings are not reality, snowflake.

Every single one of you that I've replied to ITT would get laughed out the room at any engineering company or a research lab because you're fucking clueless as well as extremely arrogant.
You remind me of undergraduates that I fail.

>>14977006
>you can't heckin' troost your senserinoes to determine if it's colder inside the fridge
Okay, I guess you have to troost the experts... but how do you know your senses aren't misleading you about what the experts say? Maybe you didn't hear them right.

>>14977007
>you're arguing that feelings determine truth?
They determine truth better more reliabily than the corporate lobbyists and talking heads that program you. Anyway, see >>14977011. You're a tedious retard.

>>14977011
Who are the experts?

>>14977016
>>14977007
>>14977006
Threadly reminder: your worldview and system of values are being rejected all over the world as we speak, and since everyone knows you are a non-reproducing life form, your leftism-prone genes will be erased as well. Your historical portrait will be painted by the people you hate the most. Your story will be told by your enemies. Everything you believe in and hold dear will be shown in such a light that future generations will regard you the same way as we regard the Bolshevik and Nazi criminals today.

>>14977019
Trusting authority is leftism now?

>>14977024
Always has been.

>>14977014
Who programs me? Alright, I'll tell you. I've been completely programmed by Prandlt, von Kármán, and Ackeret. Guilty as charged.

>>14977027
>Who programs me?
Most likely some academic midwits spoonfeeding you mediocre education and corporate media outlets.

>>14977019
I never said anything about my politics. What if I told you that I'm further to the right than you, /pol/tard, and that I wished that low IQ sheep like you were exterminated? If it was up to me, anyone who didn't understand basic aerodynamics would be purged from the gene pool, starting with you. Does that make me "left wing"? I would have exterminated Hitler and Stalin both for being total brainlets.

>>14977035
>I never said anything about my politics.
You don't need to. It's absolutely clear from your appeals to soience authorities.

>>14976941
>>14976961
>>14976947

experiment:
- measure penis with equally large stick
- put penis in bag of ice
- penis shrinks
- take penis out of bag and put next to stick
- penis is now smaller than stick
- penis confirmed smaller when cold
- let penis warm back up
- put next to stick again
- penis is equally large as stick
- put penis in refrigerator
- wait 2 hours
- take penis out of refrigerator
- put penis next to stick
- penis smaller than stick
- refrigerator now confirmed cold

get rekt.

>>14977032
Prandlt, von Kármán, and Ackeret are my intellectual heroes. Use a search engine because you've never heard of them. Probably close the browser soon after because you won't understand anything from even their Wikipedia pagea because you're a brainlet that I would press a button to exterminate. How does that make you feel, /pol/tard, that I would use eugenics to exterminate you?

>>14977040
But how do you know benis shrinks when it's cold without peer-reviewed research on it? Read Prandlt, von Kármán, and Ackeret. I would have you fucking KILLED for this post.

>>14977037
You are low IQ and deserve to be exterminated.

>>14977046
>Prandlt, von Kármán, and Ackeret are my intellectual heroes
>Thanks to them, I can't figure out if my fridge works unless there's a nature.com article about it

>>14977057
Can't wait for you to hit your intellectual ceiling and start making daily threads about cognitive enhancement. The likes of you never amount to anything in my experience.

>/pol/tard teenagers who couldn't pass an engineering or science degree and work in the field think they know thinks they saw online.
Kek.
The fact is, you're jealous of scientists and engineers because you have contributed nothing, you will contribute nothing, and your entire life, all the comforts you enjoy, have been designed and constructed by scientists and engineers. You owe your entire life to us, you fucking filthy vermin leeches. Typing on your keyboard and computer right now after scientists and engineers built that for you. You should be exterminated.

>>14977046
>use eugenics to exterminate you
I assume he'd be as confused as I am right now

>>14972555
The attitude towards skepticism, alternative hypotheses and unexpected results

>>14977069
See >>14977068. You will never have my credentials, midwit pseud.

>>14977060
Low IQ vermin. Jealous loser who will never achieve anything or produce anything, you will keep typing online on forums like this, while people like me produce and make everything that you are too stupid to understand. That's your reality.

>>14977077
See:
>>14977068
>>14977076
The education you're getting is worthless and you will never be the heckin' scientist you so desperately want to be. Too late for you.

>>14977076
Name a single project you've worked on. Go for it, make it a good lie, because I will rip you apart.

>>14977080
I work in industry, I graduated 10 years ago, and you are a loser who will never work in industry. You will never be an engineer. You will never been a scientist. You will never produce anything. You will never have accreditation. You will never have respect. You will always be an online loser with a menial job or no job at all with a giant inferiority complex. That's your lot in life because you are genetically inferior, /pol/cuck.

>>14977080
Shut up!!! SHUT UP!!! I want you to fucking DIE!!! I will be just like Prandlt, von Kármán, and Ackeret. They are my heroes. I will be the top peer reviewer in university!

>>14977093
I work in the fucking industry, you loser. Who do you think you are false-flagging like this? I'll have you fucking killed. I have 10+ years of experience in a lucrative field. I work for a company with a competitive salary. What do you do for your day job, huh??

You will never be an engineer or a scientist.
You're going to be a pathetic little leech who questions his betters while enjoying all the things your betters give to you. That is your lot in life because you were born with a genetically low IQ and are incapable of grasping abstract concepts.

I have 10 years fucking experience, by the way. I am a top peer reviewer.

>>14977099
The /pol/tard cries out in pain when you apply biological determinism to him. LMAO.

>tfw your genetic IQ is so fucking high you can't figure out if your fridge works

Man, I really shouldn't have trusted moot to have made a board where people discuss science

>op destroyed by science
>goes ballistic
many such cases

>nooo!!!! you can't just have worked as an engineer for 10 years, that makes me feel bad, reeeeeeeeeeee
You will never be a PE engineer, /pol/ cuck.

>>14977088
>>14977099
>>14977104
>>14977108
>>14977111
>>14977119
>>14977120
>the absolute state of this poster's crumbling psyche

>>14976947
kek

>>14977127
Fuck off back to the pol sub. You will never be an engineer with 10 years of experience. Poeple like you need to be literally killed.

You're just jealous you'll never be an engineer or scientist.

You're all fucking jealous of me, you filthy /pol/cucks. All of you.

>>14977134
>>14977139
See: >>14977125

>>14977144
He's a bot. Don't bother responding.

>154 replies
>15 posters

>>14977131
>schizo eugenicist who hates /pol/ for some reason
what the fuck are you talking about. meds

/pol/cucks got btfo'd and could not defend a single epistemological assertion and are seething, kek. That's what happens when you get your worldview from a 4chan board, lmfao. Stay in school and have sex you fucking virgins.

I won this thread so fucking hard. /pol/ is literally losing its mind right now. I bet they've started a thread about me back there. I'm gonna go check.

>>14977148
From what I can see, the "nobody can be trusted, but I actually trust a lot of shit without realizing it" guy got BTFO to the point of him samefagging

>>14977148
As far as I can tell, the engineer guy is the reasonable one ITT. The /pol/chuds are the ones losing their minds.

>>14976705
People don't fly in planes because they trust the laws of aerodynamics, they fly in planes because they trust that millions of people do it regularly without harm

>>14977150
>>14977154
>>14977155
>>14977156
Meds.

>>14977158
How do you know what millions of people have done regularly without harm? Do you personally know millions of people? Didn't think so, /pol/chud. You trust the experts.

>>14977160
>Do you personally know millions of people?
Yes, I'm not a loser shutin like you

>>14977163
I'm not a loser. I'm an engineer and you're jealous.

>>14977150
>>14977154
>>14977155
>>14977156
>>14977158
DOCTOR HE'S HALLUCINATING AGAIN

>>14977158
They don't "trust" that millions of people do it, they observe empirically that airplanes work. Just like you observe empirically that your fridge works.

>>14977158
>they fly in planes because they trust that millions of people do it regularly without harm
Most people do not know the assumptions that underlie their views or decisions. People take things for granted and don't think what is beyond their immediate convenience or interests. I am not sure what point you think you're making.

>>14977169
>Just like you observe empirically that your fridge works.
You can't observe empirically that your fridge works. You rely on experts to determine that.

>>14977171
this
the new fridge i had installed i had to call neil degrasse tyson to tell me if it worked

>>14977169
Empiricism implies that some objective data is being collected that can be analysed.

>>14977170
I think his point is that you're a retard and most competent people don't need "experts" to help them make basic determinations about the world.

>>14977174
Observational evidence of flight or chilling are empirical.

>>14977179
Wrong, /pol/chud. Your senses only count if you're using them to listen to what the experts said on TV.

>>14977183
tsmt fuck chuddy craKKKas

>>14977177
pretty much
my point is that the argument of "you trust scientists every time you use object [x]" is rhetoric, not logic. Like saying people who believe in the moon landing trust the nazis

>>14977177
>most competent people don't need "experts" to help them make basic determinations about the world.
Yeah, because the experts did that for you. The people who designed your fridge, built it, and sent it did all that for you. Just like climate scientists did. Just like virologists did. And many other examples. But here is the crucial point. You take zero issue with Thermodynamicists who designed your fridge because it's so convenient for you and it does not affect your political views.
>>14977179
Okay, bro, so why don't we just design planes and fridges from just looking at them bro? You are so fucking detached from reality about how things are actually made and what that require, yet you think you know what you're talking about, kek. You are not an engineer or scientist and never will be.

>>14977193
you're legit mentally ill

>>14977183
Nice little convenient feel good strawman you told yourself to make yourself feel good about the fact you have never designed or manufactured a single engineering system in a professional setting.

>>14977193
>Okay, bro, so why don't we just design planes and fridges from just looking at them bro?
More sophistry. People who designed the planes and fridges trusted science, and the people who use those machines trust the designers, but trust is not transitive

>>14977198
Can I have some empirical evidence that you can design anything, or that you at least have basic education? No deflections, please. This is a scientific discussion. I want solid data.

>>14977196
You're legit not an engineer and never will be. You're just a fucking normie with the internet that uses search engines and has never designed anything.

>>14977193
what did climate scientists ever create besides thousands of computer models?

>>14977199
>>14977202
What's your education? What real world experience do you have? What systems have you worked on? Name one. Tell me a system you've worked on.

>>14977206
Have you heard of something called the finite element method?

>>14977209
Notice how you're forced to shrivel up and deflect when asked for proof of your psychotic rambles about what a great engineer you are. lol

>>14977193
To this day nobody knows how anesthetic works. They know it does work, but have no idea how. Should we just stop doing it?

>>14977210
yes what's the relevance?

>>14977212
Name a single real world engineering project you've worked on from start to finish.

>>14977222
Provide proof of a single real world engineering project you've worked on from start to finish. You will deflect again.

>>14977209
You use systems every day -- the internet, the highway system, the medical system -- and you trust those just fine. Since you trust people who work on systems, you should trust me when I tell you I've worked on many systems. Otherwise you're a big hypocrite

>>14977229
I don't need to prove anything to you, /pol/trash. Normal people can recognize an expert when they see one, and they can tell that I'm an engineer with 10 years experience and you're a nobody.

>>14977233
So let me get this straight. You don't trust me because I've worked on systems. But you trust everyday systems like the education system or the prison system? Seems like a contradiction

>>14977238
I can trust whatever I want because I'm an engineer with 10 years of experience. You're a nobody and you should trust whoever I tell you to.

>>14977241
But do you or do you not trust people who work on systems?

>>14977233
Here's a quick picture I just snapped of my workplace. How about you?

>>14977226
Name your degree coward

>>14976705
>Then you will simply need to completely disbelief entire scientific fields and subfields because you cannot personally verify their theories, data, and assumptions. You simply don't have the time or ability to learn or understand everything.
Just because *YOU* are too lazy to actually try any kind of research by yourself and/or too stupid to understand or critically analyze them, your shouldn't assume EVERYONE is.
I know this might sound a shocker, but
*YOU* don't have the time or ability to learn or understand anything? Then you're perfectly right in "trusting" authority.
But please stop projecting your laziness/stupidity onto others and demanding everyone else to cater to your low intellectual standards.

>What's wrong with trust in authorities if it's validated by real world results?
Nice burden-of-proof shifting. YOU are the one who should explain what's wrong with NOT trusting authority when it's NOT validated by real world results.

>>14976936
You are a fucking retard. Science, engineering and data analysis ALL depend on a literally infinite number of unsupported assumptions. You can't even formulate a hypothesis, much less frame a real world problem, without doing so.

Try to establish, using only justified claims, that you shouldn't kill yourself immediately.

>>14976970
>For example, there's no such thing as "colour".
Behold, the power of negative IQ

>>14976985
>>14977740
The anon is right though, colour is something made up by the brain, there is no such thing as purple or black, your retina only has three types of cone cells to detect certain frequencies of EM Radiation and rod cells for the "intensity" of the EM waves hitting the retina. Your brain creates color by "blending together" the electrical impulses that reach the visual cortex. One thing to note is when only of the types of cone cells in the retina is stimulated it causes the subject to see either red, green, or blue. Which implies those are the only true colors we see and all other colors are a combination of them or the lack of them (being black). How the brain does this is unknown, like many other processes in the human brain.

>>14978409
>only of the types
only one of the*

>>14978409
even if there were only three colors humans could see (this is also wrong) it wouldn't mean that there weren't other colors
even if there weren't other colors it wouldn't mean that there is "no such thing as color"
in fact your argument employs three colors, so it can't possibly prove there is no such thing as color without being self-refuting

but the biggest problem with this whole line of reasoning is that even if humans did not perceive color or if color was not a physical phenomenon that doesn't mean that color doesn't exist
your eyes don't contain specific neurons to detect written words in English or mathematical equations or ill-considered arguments on 4chan either

>>14976733
Trust in authority is virtually never acquired by validating authorities against real world results.

>>14980288
Nice dubs. And in fact it's usually the opposite. Trust in authority is founded on the ignorance of real world results.

>>14974614
nta and i have nothing on other people believing in Christ but:
Faith, by philosophical definition, is something that cannot be proven, you're supposed to BELIEVE in Christ and accept him sincerely, otherwise it's not real belief
and yet our scientific endevaours contradict pretty much everything the bible (even if it allowed our philosophy to develop and reach this point in the first place, not denying that) and "God", if we take everything written there as a fact. In order to truly believe you would need to forsake science just for this occasion and irrationaly accept Christ, it really is incompatible
Honestly all these replies look like you larp really hard as christians out of contrarianism. If it's not the case then how do can you call yourself a person with a scientific worldview if you are ready to throw away experimentally and theoretically proven data just to futher your own beliefs? That is just what other anons called "soience", isn't it?

>>14980360
and also forgot to add that if you think you cheated the system and will get into heaven for "believing" no you're not, you'd be getting into hell, if it was real, because you don't believe sincerely

>>14973273
religion is cringe but this post is worse

>>14973772
That's what reddit teaches, to dismiss anything that people might look into and learn on their own as schizo shit not worthy of their time.