[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 19 KB, 437x600, darwin.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4079937 No.4079937 [Reply] [Original]

>Implying biology isn't a science.

Good luck making the world a better place without it.

You'll cry when it comes down to the physicists and mathematicians to genetically engineer superior foods and environment saving microorganisms.

>> No.4079940

Get the fuck out of here assmonkey.

>> No.4079944

>>4079940
You know it's true.

You just dislike it because you don't understand it.

>> No.4079945
File: 155 KB, 376x276, 88478948.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4079945

butthurt detected

>> No.4079946

>>4079944
>implying ochem couldn't do that better

>> No.4079948

>>4079946
>Implying biologists don't know ochem, and aren't required to learn it.

>> No.4079959
File: 37 KB, 640x480, sagegoesinallfields.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4079959

>>4079944
I understand that sage is going in all fields.

>> No.4079972
File: 1.99 MB, 320x234, 1299259732466.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4079972

Looks like you are the butthurt ones, /sci/.

>> No.4079976
File: 22 KB, 167x167, 1276914280085.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4079976

>>4079946
>>4079948

Owned.

>> No.4079982
File: 22 KB, 341x550, biologycunt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4079982

Biology is fail. The embarrassment of the sciences.

>> No.4079992
File: 67 KB, 496x448, 1301637664171.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4079992

>>4079982
Keep telling yourself that if it helps you sleep at night. You know you need us.

>> No.4079999

>>4079992
No, we need chemists. What do biologists "do" that chemists can't?

>> No.4080000
File: 48 KB, 604x557, 1268547663774.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080000

Biology appreciation thread.

>> No.4080010

Biology is a science. It's just not a hard science.

>> No.4080013

>>4080010
Why isn't it a hard science?

>> No.4080014

>>4079999
Mule work.

>> No.4080017
File: 72 KB, 704x288, litfags.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080017

>>4079982
>that fucking image

>> No.4080018

>>4080013
Biologists don't even know what an integral is.

>> No.4080019

>>4080000
>>4079999
I think you mean quads thread

>> No.4080020

>>4080018
I've taken calculus. Of course I do.

>> No.4080021

>>4080013
A "hard science" is on that has a heavy foundation based upon mathematics. Such is not the case with biology. Many biology majors aren't even required to take calculus.

>> No.4080029

>>4080021
Just because biology isn't heavy on mathematics doesn't mean it doesn't have a strong foundation with applicable rules.

>> No.4080030

>>4080029
>biology
>hard science
Pick one.

>> No.4080036

>>4080029
>strong foundation with applicable rules.

C'mon son

>> No.4080038
File: 54 KB, 320x320, 1281397036840.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080038

>>4080030
>implying butthurt

>> No.4080041

>>4079976
The samefag is strong in this one.

Ochemists don't need to study fucking turtles.

>> No.4080045

Arguing about your fucking undergraduate major is so fucking retarded you wouldn't believe. If you have ever made a serious post to that effect, find a gun and just end yourself ASAP.

>> No.4080046
File: 3 KB, 126x117, 1318600804374s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080046

>>4080013
we have this thread on a biweekly basis. look it up in the archives.

here's a short list of reasons:
1) proven lower GRE scores than physicists/chemists and engineers
2) proven lower IQ than physicists/chemists and engineers
3) statistically higher belief in a deity
4) not classified as a "fundamental science"
5) mock/make fun of physicists
6) call physicists egotistical for considering physics to be the "master of all sciences" (which, we don't)
7) claim that physicists/chemists do not know shit about biology
8) vanilla biology is route memorization
9) little to absolutely no mathematics involved in fundamental models
10) models which do involve mathematics are repeatedly violated in almost every experimental biological system
11) models are never "set in stone" - you don't see newton's laws of motion change on a daily basis and see people flying off the face of the earth in their underpants
12) biologists have a strong case of 'physics envy' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy)), which is even evident in this thread.
13) biologists usually take modified mathematics/physical science courses that are less rigorous because they are either too lazy or incapable of doing proofs

---

under this basis, we solely declare vanilla biology on the rank of the soft sciences.

(sources to any of these provided upon request - this isn't at all trolling)

>> No.4080048

>>4080010

Chem BA here, an undergrad degree in Bio is soft. Though, a PhD in biochemistry and/or molecular biology (or, any other of the related fields) is legit, IMO.

>> No.4080049

>>4080045
my nigga

>> No.4080051
File: 149 KB, 431x380, 1292744918217.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080051

>>4080041
Neither do I, bro.

I've studied organic chemistry, biochemistry, neurology, microbiology, cell biology, etc.

Never have I taken a class about animals.

>> No.4080052

>>4080046
/thread
boomroasted
etc

>> No.4080055

>>4080046
>8) vanilla biology is route memorization
>8) vanilla biology is rote memorization
FTFY

>> No.4080056

>>4080020
are you sure about that? just because you've taken calculus doesn't mean you know what a fucking integral is. have you taken graduate level real analysis (eg - rudin)?

>> No.4080058

>>4080055
thanks, i just noticed that.

polite sage

>> No.4080059

>>4080046
wut is vanilla?

also
>physicists
>"we"

sure thing brah

>> No.4080060

>>4080046
Lol, this post is complete shit.

Try again.

>> No.4080062

>>4080056
for some reason this post made me lol hard

>> No.4080064

>>4080060
>>4080059
biologists detected.

>> No.4080065
File: 22 KB, 475x475, iwlnk9ol3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080065

>>4080046
>>4080046
>>4080046

>> No.4080068
File: 46 KB, 432x600, 5456546.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080068

keep em coming biologists

>> No.4080071

>>4080051
>neurology
>not about animals

Fucking biologists don't even know their own classification system.

>> No.4080070

>>4080046
Care to outline the indications of a Kruskal-Wallis analysis in biostatistics, champ? If it's such a simple question, you should know!

>> No.4080075

>>4080046

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_and_theoretical_biology

>> No.4080076
File: 10 KB, 460x355, 1321415870963.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080076

It's funny how biologists like to justify their field by saying, "Oh, we study [X chemistry field] and [X physics field] as well."

If biology itself were a hard science, why would you need to emphasize that you are also studying those chemistry/physics courses?

Tl;dr: biologists are in denial.

>> No.4080077
File: 176 KB, 500x407, IMG_8054.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080077

>>4080046
>physics
>hard science
pick one and come at me.

>> No.4080082
File: 2.38 MB, 320x180, 1322276535338.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080082

>>4080076
>below humanities
its like it isn't even a science!

>> No.4080083
File: 216 KB, 365x320, 1312326264176.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080083

>>4080077

>> No.4080084

>>4080082
Nice job reading the chart.

>> No.4080085

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_envy

>> No.4080089

if biology isn't a hard science - can psychology be one?

>> No.4080091
File: 14 KB, 507x354, thad.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080091

>>4080075
>only bullshit on the entire page
>mfw

>> No.4080092
File: 451 KB, 1024x768, 1311762658355.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080092

>>4080085
>edit history
>ishygddt

3/10

>> No.4080095
File: 37 KB, 740x308, purity.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080095

>>4080085
Does this mean that physicists can be envious of mathematicians?

>> No.4080093

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/02/why_do_physicists_think_they_a.php

>> No.4080100
File: 221 KB, 1080x1824, nope.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080100

>>4080093

>> No.4080101

>>4080076

>standard excel bar chart
>no source

Lmao

>> No.4080105
File: 19 KB, 413x310, laughingdevito.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080105

>>4080093
>Some butthurt neckbeard biologist rants on his special little blog about how all the mean physicists made him feel inferior

>> No.4080106

>>4080101
>babby can't look up GRE scores
http://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/GRE/pdf/994994.pdf

>> No.4080109

http://www.ncsu.edu/chass/philo/GRE%20Scores%20by%20Intended%20Graduate%20Major.htm

>> No.4080114 [DELETED] 
File: 24 KB, 450x338, IMG_8796.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080114

>>4080077
biologist isn't a hard science.

come at me bro.

>> No.4080118 [DELETED] 

>>4080077
>>4080114

>no timestamps on either

>> No.4080120
File: 24 KB, 450x338, IMG_8796.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080120

>>4080077
biology isn't a hard science.

come at me bro.

>> No.4080122

>>4080109
>>4080106

I looked and looked but couldn't find an actual comparative analysis anywhere! Not a one!

>> No.4080123

>>4080095
mathematics is a tool.

nothing more.

>> No.4080126

Only trolls belittle any field.
The sooner you realize this, the sooner /sci/ will get better.

>> No.4080127

>>4080122
you are kidding me. you actually need someone to point out the individual pages on the GRE yearly syllabi? you can't form a coherent thought process yourself?

>> No.4080128
File: 108 KB, 570x539, grediscipline.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080128

>>4080122
Jesus christ, do you need to be spoonfed?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gre+scores+by+discipline

>> No.4080130
File: 298 KB, 855x550, jelly_sparkle_by_don_komandorr-d3itaf3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080130

>>4080123
>call mathematicians tools
>not jelly
Totally jelly.

>> No.4080131

>>4080120

What are you up to now?

>> No.4080134

>>4080126
Agreed. Unfortunately it will never happen.

>> No.4080137
File: 55 KB, 330x357, feelsgoodman2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080137

Engineering master race here

>> No.4080138
File: 21 KB, 625x625, 1320552227872.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080138

>http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/sci_relig.htm
>Disbelief in God and immortality among NAS biological scientists was 65.2% and 69.0%, respectively, and among NAS physical scientists it was 79.0% and 76.3%.

>> No.4080140

>>4080120
That is a fake. I have seen that same MIT picture before.

>> No.4080142

>>4080128
>Philosophy ranked higher than Chemistry
Makes perfect sense.

>> No.4080143

>>4080140
[citation needed]

>> No.4080146

>>4080140
maybe because it's the same person?

>> No.4080151

>>4080126
That's why I want to be an applied mathematics guy. I'd love to equally pound all sciences and fields like the sluts they are with mathematical models.

>> No.4080148

>>4080120

Orly?

>> No.4080156

>>4080128
A numerical ranking is not an analysis. The differences between cohorts could very well be insignificant.

>> No.4080158
File: 21 KB, 249x278, 1320691550284.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080158

>>4080151
>he thinks applied mathematics is more than a tool
pure math master race reporting in.

>> No.4080159
File: 23 KB, 387x313, foryourhealth.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080159

>>4079937
>this forced meme finally trolled somebody

That only took 8 months. Worth it!

>> No.4080162

>>4080158
Do your pure mathematics without applied mathematics and tell me how that works out for you.

>> No.4080164

>>4080159
OP here, this is my first time making this thread, lol.

>> No.4080165
File: 28 KB, 400x400, Facial-Tattoo-Designs.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080165

>>4080156
>he thinks ETS would release that much statistical data

>> No.4080171

>>4080164
>you're the one that got trolled.

OR

you just unleashed the fucking Kraken of reverse troll.

>> No.4080177
File: 177 KB, 150x134, sw50sw8sw578.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080177

>>4080165
dats rapist

>> No.4080180

>>4080138

"We found the highest percentage of belief among NAS mathematicians (14.3% in God, 15.0% in immortality). Biological scientists had the lowest rate of belief (5.5% in God, 7.1% in immortality), with physicists and astronomers slightly higher (7.5% in God, 7.5% in immortality)."

LOL at mathematicians. So much for the most pure field. They can't even figure out how to not be brainwashed by cults.

>> No.4080182
File: 18 KB, 251x300, 0223_tony_kornheiser_getty_bn-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080182

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=103616

>> No.4080188

>>4080180

im surprised that astronomers are more likely to believe in a god than biologists, you'd think one look at the universe and they understand how unlikely it is

>> No.4080189
File: 128 KB, 500x375, 4806166899_659e68eaaf.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080189

there is no such thing as biology being a hard science. tell me one time where someone has claimed biology represents infatuating science. a biologist? look on... it's hearsay. there are only 2 actual hard sciences: chemistry and physics. i'm sure it can also be rationalized that chemistry and physics are also inevitably linked to one another (through thomas young's theories, i presume) and form one single "science", if you still need to call it that. i strongly believe that at least the 3 primary sciences are just a formal representation created by the biologists to conspire against the chemists in order to gain funding from the governments of the world.

>> No.4080192

You must also remember that we call it three hard sciences, but to a mathematician who may or may not care about 'hard sciences', we are nothing more than the applied-ness of his axioms. The reason that we say everything is 3 hard sciences is because that is how we've been taught, but if someone started teaching kids that only chemistry and physics were hard, they would believe, so if we started to believe that psychoanalysis was a hard science, why can't it be? Even I can see the scientific community having been a single hard science, and one day going to be four, and i'm only 5.

>> No.4080199

>>4080180

MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED
MATHFAGS AND PHYSICS = BRAINWASHED

>> No.4080219

>>4080199
>obvious bio major

>> No.4080301

Holy shit and I thought /v/ was bad

This is the epitome of pedantic right here.

Must be autism.

>> No.4080347
File: 79 KB, 703x474, 1322356332191.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080347

>>4080301
>he thinks autism somehow relates to the concept of mathematically rigorous sciences

>> No.4080422
File: 80 KB, 450x600, 1321686987201.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4080422

>>4080347

>implying autism and mathematically rigorous sciences aren't highly correlated

>> No.4080428

>>4080422
>implying that without mathematically rigorous sciences we'd still have a decent interpretation and understanding of the universe
>implying you aren't a biofag

>> No.4081455

>>Implying biology isn't a science.
nobody here ever said that.

>> No.4081487

>>4081455
>implying implied implications that biology is not a science
I Sure hope you guys don't do this.

>> No.4081492
File: 22 KB, 318x475, biologistmath.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4081492

>> No.4081501

>>4081487
>implying implication that imply that the OP did not imply that he implicated biology as not being a hard science
ishygddt.

>> No.4081510
File: 20 KB, 331x500, bioinformatics.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4081510

You are not prepared, /sci/

>> No.4081518

>>4081510
>bioninformatics
>more than just code monkeys for biologists

>> No.4081526
File: 521 B, 10x10, 1320599930451.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4081526

>>4081510
>he thinks that adding math makes it a hard science