/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16065222
I remember when the people who argued for evolution evolved into people who believe women can have a penis and men can give birth to children.

>>16065222
UKs population grew by ~12M since 1991
8M out of this were just imported shitskins and niggers.

New-atheist fags like Sam Harris and that total pseudo-intellectial clown Matt Dilahunty were grifting off this well into the 2010s, because they literally had nothing better to do and it was an easy platform for their egos.

>>16065262
Got to give feminism credit for destroying the New Atheism movement. And it's funny how Sam Harris completely fipped out over Trump and covid and can't return to anything approaching rationality. Being the ice cold rational thinking was his calling card but he went nuts and just can't stop now.

>>16065225
I remember when the people who oppose eugenics and therapeutic abortion evolved into people who worship and marry monkeys in order to own the people who believe in evolution.

>>16065222
There's been an anti-evolution thread up since half February lol

>>16065283
>I'm calm and collected. I am the better man.

>>16065225
Suppose you spent your entire life thinking that all rectangles were squares. And then you see people talking about rectangles that are not square, and you think, wow, these people are crazy. But actually you don't realise that they're talking about something else than you are.

Now imagine that you actually know this but you still insist they're talking about squares because that makes it easier for you to refute

>>16065222
I remember christians not reading Dawkins' books and making every objection already addressed by those books.

>>16065222
species transmutative evolution is fake news. And on a side not, nobody has explained abiogenesis, ie why or how the earth went from 0 living matter on earth to greater than zero living mater on earth from one delta t of planck time to the next delta t of plank time.

>>16065222
I was there in the 90s and nobody debated it. Nobody gave a shit about the matter. That started in the 00s with fedora atheism and the evolutionists have pretty consistently been made fools of in every debate.

>>16065222
If evolution is real, why do niggers still live like cavemen?

>>16065334
Ah, I see you're a midwit who's impressed by spectacle.

>>16065330
Point mutations of one allele into another followed by natural selection (i.e., the classical Darwinian model of evolution) obviously can't account for the different karyotypes between species (i.e., distinctive set of chromosomes). So the classical model is incomplete, but to use that to claim that means it doesn't happen is a strawman. A bigger model of evolution would account for how one karyotype changes into another.

>>16065330
The absence of an explanation of abiogenesis does not disprove evolution, and it certainly does not imply creationism. It just means we don't know how life arose.

>>16065330
Until somebody comes up with a better solution abiogenesis is the best theory there is

>>16065286
because blacks dont believe in evolution

>>16065222
[SPOILER] some of my family still do that lmao [/SPOILER]

>>16065222
Now we know for a fact that evolution is a myth made up in the before times and there are no differences in the races.

>>16065454
>The absence of an explanation of abiogenesis does not disprove evolution
Evolution can't be disproved, its a nonscientific conjecture, not a real scientific theory

Destroying "science" in 1919:
>In 1859, the thing to do the thing to do was to accept Darwinism; now many biologists are revolting and trying to conceive of something else. The thing to do was to accept it in its day, but Darwinism of course was never proved:
>The fittest survive.
>What is meant by the fittest?
>Not the strongest; not the cleverest-
>Weakness and stupidity everywhere survive.
>There is no way of determining fitness except in that a thing does survive.
>"Fitness", then, is only another name for "survival".
>Darwinism:
>That survivors survive.

>>16065454
>The absence of an explanation of abiogenesis does not disprove evolution
There's a theory that the flying spaghetti monster was the first life on Earth and all the other lifeforms evolved from it. The absence of an explanation of abiogenesis does not disprove the flying spaghetti monster theory either! What a coincidence!

>>16066600
Science is about how not about who / what / why.

if it exists, it happened somehow permitted by the laws of this universe. if it exists it obeyed and still obeys the laws of this universe. there is no race between science and spiritual crowd (invoking god-like entities). no matter how long it takes to figure out how shit (always) happens in this universe, especially if it's some obscurely low mathematical chance, the spiritual crowd can never claim their bullshit. there is no arbitrary limit set on how much time science is allowed to figure it out, once past that point the schizoids are implicitly right. can take to the end of the universe and spiritualfags still have no claim.

>>16066619
>God isn't real because I don't want him to be real
>I have zero proof to substantiate this claim
>but even without proof it's still science because God being fake feels more sciency to me
>just trust me, in the future an expert like me, dawkins or sagan will prove it one day! I swear!

>>16066672
no reason why science wouldn't figure out if some god exists. it's not off the menu.

>>16065222
if you're an ape, why should I debate you?

>>16066680
because you're one as well? what you are is not a choice

>>16066676
>no reason why science wouldn't figure out if some god exists
There's every reason why science will never figure this out. Because science has zero say here. While soientists often attempt LARPing as philosophers (meanwhile gaslighting everyone because they ostensibly denouce philosophy), these kinds of questions are completely out of reach to science and scientific methodologies. The existence of God is a metaphysical, philosophical, theological question, not a scientific one. As this poster pointed out >>16066618, science has no say in these types of questions. So yes, it is completely off the menu for science.

It should be noted that science properly speaking assumes no metaphysic. This should be obvious because all the pioneers of science were fanatically religious and devout worshippers of God. Many of them were even clergymen! Soience however is called soicence because it assumes materialism, which is a philosophical and metaphysical position, making soience more similiar to a bizzare cult complete with it's own beliefs, practices, and creation story, rather than simply being a methodology for studying the behavior of nature.

>>16065225
one of the funniest things I witnessed in my life was watching the people argue against christians in favor of natural selection, only to turn around 15-20 years later and deny that natural selection applies to humans, or at minimum there is some magical aura that prevents it from applying to our cognitive abilities.

>>16066239
>now many biologists are revolting and trying to conceive of something else
No they aren’t
>What is meant by the fittest?
>"Fitness", then, is only another name for "survival". Darwinism: That survivors survive.
Fitness is the measure of an organism’s ability to propagate its genes, not necessarily individual survival. There is a reason so many have behaviours and anatomy that are detrimental to their survival but beneficial to breeding success

>>16066672
>THERE'S DARK ENERGY ALL AROUND US
>WHAT DO YOU MEAN IT'S NOT REAL?
>JUST BECAUSE WE CAN'T SEE OR MEASURE IT IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT REAL YOU FUCKING ANTISEMITIC CHUD!!!
>WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU BELIEVE IN GOD YOU 5TH CENTURY PISSCEL?
>GOD ISN'T REAL BECAUSE WE CAN'T SEE OR MEASURE HIM IN ANY WAY!!!!

>>16066713
if science cuts through your bullshit then I can see why you'd have an issue with it.