/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15976513
Video?

>>15976517
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b86dzTFJbkc

>>15976513
Hume

>>15976513
LMAO, climate change is not like the others. Climate change cultists believe Venus was like the Earth, that is utter stupidity.

>>15976513
i trust the science. why don't you?

>>15976513
Nobody denies sciene.
One type of people simply believes in everything that is followed by the introduction:
> a study found that...
While the other type of people don't.

It's only science non-believers vs belivers.
Nobody actually reads the science.
Nobody actually understands the scientific method.

If everything is "science" nothing is.

>>15976513
You can't, and honestly it's a waste of time to even try.

The best way to make science accepted is to have institutions of science do their best to remain neutral ground without explicit political alignments. This will never be perfect, but making an effort to have scientific institutions being outside the sways of political fashion will make a large dent in the problem. It is also generally good to have scientific institutions capable of allowing heterodox theory to be pursued if the people who are pursuing it are capable of doing serious work. Things like expelling professors over their academic work being too controversial or their personal beliefs being something the institution doesn't like generally sow distrust among people who aren't involved.

>>15976513
>disingenuously equating mainstream commie ideology with right wing fringe beliefs (first three) and rejection of ecocultism (fourth) in a flailing attempt at bothsidesism
Sad!

>>15976669
It's pretty fringe among the left (outside of the internet where being a sane human being seems to be considered extremist) to deny the reality of biological sex. Most lefties (and even explicit Marxists) won't deny the reality of biological sex if you have a real conversation about it in person. It just seems to be when you signal to them that you are opposed to tranny stuff that their cultural programming takes over and they are so willing to contradict their own eyes.

>evolution deniers
show me the abiogenesis
show me the new species
>war crimes
not science
>global warming
has been disproved on a scientific basis over and over again.

>>15977305
>show me the abiogenesis
How many times do we have to repeat that the origin of life is outside the scope of evolution theory and therefore not an argument? You're misrepresenting evolution theory and attack the misrepresentation.

>>15977305
You are the CIA pet here

>>15977359
>the origin of life is outside the scope of evolution theory and therefore...

...therefore is Evolution is junk.

>>15976675
There is no contradiction here. Biological sex is simply not the same thing as gender. Of course biological sex exists. And of course trans identities are valid. If you don't follow, you don't follow the science.

>>15977371
projection

>>15977305
I love this meme because it divides the right and makes them paranoid, which one of their schizo friends might be a glowie.

>>15977925
Gender is not a scientific concept. It's a literary concept (not science) that has been co-opted by structuralist anthropologists (also not really science, but at least in the local neighborhood) in order to attempt to explain the notion of a coherent set of social roles which correspond to sex. This co-opted concept was then worn as a skin suit by cynical queer theorists who replaced it with a "prism of identification" through which they view the agent corresponding to the social roles. There is no meaningful separation between "adult human female" and "woman" in scientific terms.

>>15977371
The type they install listening devices in?

>>15976513
I think it's hilarious that the only thing he can point to that left people don't believe (but should, according to him) is racism, but the things he says the right doesn't believe is science, history, and things that we've known for literally thousands of years.

>>15977925
>>15979148
gender was an exact synonym for sex until 1990s postmodern gender feminism, and the neo-distinction is about as scientifically useful as the distinction between water and h2o

>>15976530
>>15976669
>>15977305
do you claim carbon emissions don't increase the average global temperature? that's all climate change denial is. ridiculing politicians and activists for stupid rhetoric about it isn't the same thing

>>15976513
>stereotype accuracy
>science
choose one

>>15979687
it can be measured scientifically how accurate stereotypes are, and it turns out they're pretty accurate most of the time

>>15976513
Genocide

>>15979148
Couldn't be more wrong. The idea of a "biological woman" has long been refuted by anatomists. There are no female-specific hormones, there are no female-specific organs, there aren't even any female-specific cells. Everything found in so-call females can also be found in so-called males, and vice versa. Humans are a gender fluid species, the science is completely settled.

>>15979730
boys gotta dick girls ain't
>game over

>>15976513
I’m more genuinely shocked and terrified by biology deniers than climate deniers.

You can at least say one is overblown, the other is not. “Men can get pregnant” is brain death.

>>15979730
I can't imagine being this out of touch with reality. It's impressive really. You are so lost in the sauce that you believe that the potential for genetic abnormalities in which non-fertile individuals can have atypical anatomy entirely invalidates the most unifying concept in all of complex multicellular biology (namely sexual reproduction and sexual phenotype). Genuinely, get some help.

>>15979730
I know it's a tired meme at this point but genuinely, please learn 5th grade level biology. This is embarrassing.

>>15979804
>calculus doesn't exist, just learn 5th grade math

>>15979811
The difference is that 5th grade math does not disprove calculus.

>>15979812
Except a holistic understanding of gender identity and chromosomal expression, as well as comparative anatomy and hormone function, does improve your myopic superstition-based gender binary. You may as well point to a map on a wall and say "See? The Earth is flat!"

>>15979816
You used AI to get that many buzzwords in your message?

>>15979811
here’s what you were looking for
d(f(x), f(y)) = c*d(x, y)

>>15979614
HERE HERE!
I deny gravity, and whether that is because of my politics or profit has nothing to do with it!
I deny gravity because of the evidence...

Watch as I walk off this buildin....
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

>>15979812
>YoU cAnNoT tAkE tHe SqUaRe RoOt Of A nEgAtIvE nUmBeR

>>15979848
That depends on the set you are working in though.

>>15979816
What, in your view, is the proportion of the human population which conforms to atypical gender presentation and anatomy? Of these people who present this way (or have atypical anatomy) what proportion of them do you estimate to be reproductively fertile and positive contributors to society? Considering we are talking about viewing biology through an explicitly western 21st century ideological lens, you might as well elaborate how you square your current perspective with material reality.

>>15979857
Does a 5th grader have that nuance? No. And neither do they on sexes.

>>15976513
i also deny globe earth (along with big bang and heliocentrism), mainstream accepted history, germ theory and "gender on the spectrum" retardation

It’s amazing how the leftists became the biology deniers, not the right wingers, who appear to have adopted biology as a weapon to use against trannies.

What happened?

>>15979916
>What happened?
You've finally given up on reality and be fully embraced your delusion.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25693544/

>>15979910
>does a 5th grader have that nuance
Yes?
You mean you tell me you didn't learn sets before you started learning calculus?

I honestly never thought I’d live to see the day when people actually became stupid enough to believe that men can actually get pregnant.

During a senate hearing no less.

>>15979929
I was ten in 5th grade. I had no idea what a set was. Or a group. Or a ring. Or a field. I know all 151 Pokémon though.

>>15979945
>no idea what a set was
>know all 151 Pokémon

>>15976513

Is the science that creates electricity and sends it to our homes really the same "science"TM that says there's 65 genders?

>>15979958
No because almost the entire field of psychology cannot replicate any of its tests, where as even an imbecile can fuck around with a starter electrician set for kids and find the same results as people did 150 years ago.

>>15979910
This is just a list of separate disorders and the genetic contributors to those disorders.

Here is a key question I never see answered by people who believe sex to be properly "bi-modal" or "fluid." What is the x-axis that continuously varies? The chart you've posted seems to base it on qualitative correspondence to "typical male presentation" or "typical female presentation" but there is next to nothing that actually links them together in this continuous manner (as far as I can tell).

>>15979903
>What, in your view, is the proportion of the human population which conforms to atypical gender presentation and anatomy?
100%
>Of these people who present this way (or have atypical anatomy) what proportion of them do you estimate to be reproductively fertile and positive contributors to society?
100%
>Considering we are talking about viewing biology through an explicitly western 21st century ideological lens, you might as well elaborate how you square your current perspective with material reality.
No, how about YOU try to explain YOUR retarded gender binary in the face of objective reality.

>>15979975
>claims something outlandish
>doesn't present any proof
>asks others to present proof
Trannies are so funny.

>>15979975
Okay, so now I know you're just trolling. You genuinely believe that 100% of human beings have atypical sexual anatomy? Do you understand what that even means?

I'll give you a hint at how sexual classification works. In all mammals (of which humans clearly are) and most vertebrates in general we have a clear sexual categorization which is designated via "primary sex characteristics." Those primary sex characteristics are the following: Production of large gametes (e.g., ovum) indicates what we designate as female. Production of small gametes (e.g., sperm) indicates what we designate as male. Production of no gametes or non-functional gametes indicates what we designate as neuter/non-sexed.

Secondary sex characteristics (sexual dymorphism in anatomy, presentation, visual phenotype) emerge as a mechanism to facilitate sexual reproduction through the primary sex characteristics. Complications in secondary sex characteristics serve as a layer of "aesthetic difference" above the primary sex characteristics which define the evolutionary patterns of sexual reproduction of the species. Disorders of sexual development (which is what you are claiming leads to ambiguity in this cateogrization) doesn't make any difference in primary human sex categorization. In addition, they are tendencies that tend to be evolutionarily eliminated because they either lead to complete infertility, or a significant disadvantage in reproductive fertility.

What you are claiming is necessary for sexual classification of human beings is similar to someone claiming that it is incorrect to categorize humans as a bipedal species in the genus homo because some people can be born missing limbs and some people (like yourself) have mental capacity more typical of prehominids. Exceptions set the rule, they don't break them.

>>15979967
>a list of separate disorders
You are a living meme.

>>15980012
A spline is a functional fastener. If you have CAIS, you are not a functional human male and will be permanently reproductively infertile.

>>15980015
So are children and women after the menopause not functional humans?

>>15979995
And who invented the concept of "sexual characteristics"? Perpetrators of the gender binary lie. It's fruit of the poisonous tree.

>>15980024
>>15980033
Children and adolescents are in the process of sexual development. If they do not develop sexual fertility, then yes, they are not sexually male or female. If they develop sexual fertility, then they are the sex which is associated with the gamete they produce (female if ovum, male if sperm).

Similarly, if someone was sexually fertile and have aged out of their fertility, that doesn't negate that they were sexually fertile in the way that having an SRY mutation which prevents the proper development of fertile testes.

I'm certain you at some level understand this. What you are looking for is an "aesthetic based" biological classification scheme. Biological sex classifications don't care about your hobbies or how you view yourself or how you dress. All of that is irrelevant to the question of biological sex classifications, which are based in fertility and typical anatomy associated with fertility. The rest is all social categorization we use for societal convenience, not biologically consistent taxonomy.

>>15979910
this image is dumb
All outcomes fit within "possesses Y chromosome (male)" and "does not possess Y chromosome (female)"
All the "categories" as the other anon said, are a list of disorders that affect fertility and phenotype. They're vanishingly rare enough that in ten years of medicine I've never met a single patient with Turner's, Klinefelters or Androgen insensitivity, and whilst I'm not trying to pretend those people don't exist, it makes no sense to abandon your otherwise perfectly fine categorisation strategy because of outliers that are specifically different to the rest of the group.

>tldr if a factory only makes red cars and blue cars, your blue car is not suddenly a new third colour if it rolled off the production line with a big scratch on the side

not least is how this relates to transgenderism (it doesn't, it's the trans lobby trying to appeal to scientific authority in an attempt to gain legitimacy)

>>15980145
I should say *superficially* different to the rest of the group. they still have the same chromosomes as men and women

>>15976513
The guy sounds like a lefty bot with the "I dont support republican, I hate republican, I swear. please believe my opinion on conservatives!!!"

>>15980145
>in ten years of medicine I've never met a single patient with Turner's, Klinefelters or Androgen insensitivity
Klinefelter affects one in 500 men, potentially more, given that many people never get diagnosed. Do you even work with patients? Statistically you'd encounter one in your first month of medicine.

>>15980092
If your body will, does, or did make viable eggs on it's own, you're female. Sperm, male. Neither, agender. Both, pangender. You're either gendered or you aren't. People who are gendered shouldn't pretend not to be and people who aren't shouldn't be bullied for something out of their control.

>>15980024
moar pls

>>15979844
Get two covid boosters in each arm right now and cut the rest of your penis.

>>15979730
I can't wait to cut your face out of your skull and make a silly tik tok video with it.

>>15980193
All so-called "males" are capable of producing eggs with the right hormone inducement. It's been already tested in the laboratory.

>>15980229
What on earth are you even talking about? Can you link a PDF because googling what you are saying is leading me nowhere.

>>15980273
don't be so breathless

>>15976513
By killing every /pol/tard.

There's a blog that checks for p-hacking in papers and Haidt's work showed considerable signs of it. He is another one of those talking head, low practical output youtube intellectuals

By understanding that statistics isn't fucking science and for scientists to start telling the truth for once.

>>15980201
what does that have to do with global warming

>>15976513
ban americans from the internet and suddenly everyone becomes non-retarded again

>>15979916
>became
The left has been biology deniers since they rejected the idea that it was possible for evolution to effect human cognition, which has been like 60 years at this point at least.

>>15981326
Why are rightoids so anti-grammar?

>>15981195
Everything bad you claim about Americans is worse in Europe

>>15981331
This is an image board, not a thesis, queer. I'm writing as I would speak it.

>>15981339
>/Jˈfɛkt/
>/əˈfɛkt/
So you are not only dyslexic but also have a speech impediment?

>>15981352
Using "effect" instead of "affect" is a grammatical error, not dyslexia, dipshit, and the words are nearly homonyms.

>>15981367
It's a sign of low IQ or disorders like ADHD.

>>15981386
No it isn't. But this whole conversation IS a sign that you didn't like what I said, but had no argument against it.

>>15981395
There cannot be any arguments against a baseless claim like yours. It shows that you're not willing to engage in a fact-based debate. I could ask for a source for your claim. Would I get ignored or be presented with a soijak asking for a source as well? I could ask you to elaborate, but I honestly don't want to enable your nonsense.

>>15981403
You want a source that the left claims that evolution hasn't affected human cognition? It's the entire basis behind affirmative action and critical race theory. Based on the assumption that the intrinsic cognitive capacity of all demographies are the same, they conclude that any difference in outcome must be due to systemic differences, which ought to be accounted for. But the assumption is utterly baseless.

>>15981426
I don't think you're going to present one, so I won't even ask for it. But feel free to blow my mind.

>>15976513
By putting every /pol/tard against the wall.

>>15981433
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/can-progressives-be-convinced-that-genetics-matters

>>15981456
That's just someone else talking about "the left". That's neither from the 60s, nor proving anything beyond you not being the only one with your opinion.

>>15981464
>the left believes that races are genetically equivalent in cognition and will reject all evidence to the contrary as being unelucidated evironmental effects
>>source??
>post a source of a left leaning behavioral geneticist being shunned among progressives for her work merely being associated with the general idea of race and intrinsic intelligence
>>better source??
Literal jewish behavior. You refuse to even address the actual argument.

>>15981475
Racism outside of /b/ is a rule violation.

>>15981480
not him but jewish isn't a race fyi

>>15981480
So are low quality posts, yet here you are
>>15981485
They disagree, and so do I.

>>15976513

>>15981488
are these digits even allowed outside of /b/?

>>15981480
Heres the conditional whiteness of jews again.
Scrodinger's race. When its convenient for them to group themselves with whites they try to do that, when its convenient for them to call themselves a unique race they pic that opinion.

>>15981958
What you described is no different than being both Scottish and White and using whichever identity group is most convenient for you to express your political diarrhea. The difference is that Scottish people haven't manufactured an ethnic mythology that makes indentity arbtitrage profitable.

>>15976513
>stereotype accuracy deniers

>>15976513
>climate change deniers
this aged badly

>>15980421
>p-hacking

>>15980421
oh really? which papers?

>>15976513
>war crimes deniers

>>15979730
No specific cells, eh? Does female body produce sperm, and male - ova?

>>15982303
Well? What does the literature tell us?

>>15976513
>left
>stereotype accuracy deniers
What kind of brainrotten terminally online manbaby writes this garbage holy shit.

>>15981491
>see this image macro?it defines my reality. no I don't have evidence
actual brainrot
take two weeks off of the internet

>>15981326
>they rejected the idea that it was possible for evolution to effect human cognition
Show me one left winger in the world that denies this.

>>15983179
Um so you're saying it's right-wing people who are more likely to deny stereotype accuracy?

>>15983179
Maybe he means those who deny any connection between the stereotype of a group and their actual behaviour.
Of course writing it that way is really faggy.

>>15983191
Stereotype accuracy is the scientific term

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C21&q=stereotype+accuracy&btnG=

>>15976513
So political extremes are associated with mental illness?

>>15976513
This thread proves him right. The left and the right are both lacking a basic understanding of the natural sciences.

>>15983190
i'm saying stereotype accuracy denial isn't a thing unless you start from the assumption that they are right all of the time.

>>15983198
yes. this thread proves the left are evolution deniers
Personally I stopped counting how many marxist-creationists we had itt.

rightards who call every leftist a marxist or communist are just as retarded as leftards who call every right-winger a nazi or fascist

>>15983202
not true, it's a scientific term, you're just butthurt abt the concept