/sci/ - Science & Math

This might explain the work done by Dr. Emoto of Japan where they've been able to photograph a freezing drop of water after its been imprinted with a thought, word, picture. Also, it might explain homeopathy, the imprinting of herbal medicine upon water, then diluted (thus creating its 'strength') and shaken, bear weight. I have seen the work when nothing else did. We must admit that there are many things in this world that we do not understand

>>4181745
>>>/x/

but we can teleport individual atoms using sophisticated hardware and lots of energy.

is it REALLY so hard to believe that a complex chain of proteins just JUMPED A FEW FEET?!

no, in this world of crazy beeping light-boxes and those space men, anything could be possible.

> I guess ignorance is just easier

yes, and takes a lot less time

>>4181751
It's doubtful it happened. Read the fucking paper if you're older than 11. The "scientist" is retarded.

>OK, read the paper on arxiv. There's no quantum field theory in it (my field is quantum optics in laser cavities, so I have some background). There's some handwaving quantum woo phrases thrown around and that's it.
>
>Though with this bit in section 2 (from the paper - http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1012/1012.5166v1.pdf)) trying to filter the virus size 120nm with two filters of sizes 100nm and 20nm (yup, that's what they said) I'd say thier experimental ability is suspect as well...

I can see Hollywood having fun with this.
>fall asleep near an EM oscillator
>wake up after accidentally teleporting to Alpha Centauri

>>4181759
>doesn't understand (blatantly obvious) sarcasm >>4181751

>rage's out at articles that nobody will take seriously

>wan't people to think he's smart by posting on /sci/

i'ts not working, by the way.

>>4181745
>Tacticalfacepalm.jpg

Did your mother have any children that lived?

Even the spastic that published these papers (also the reviewer and author by the way) stated "This in no way supports homeopathy, in fact if anything it makes it less credible".

If water has memory, you drank the memory of millions of peoples faeces. You shit-eater.

>>4181763
>can't into apostrophes
>thinks sarcasm is always blatantly obvious in text
>doesn't know real retards that actually believe this shit actually write like that
>thinks he can backpeddle and pretend he is one of them
>bumps this thread

You're so retarded it hurts.

>>4181763
That wasn't me you fucking douche.

I posted this.

>attempt to take potshots at the intelligence of others.
>wan't

Oh and by the way idiot, your 'sarcasm' was not obvious and people do take this seriously... are you fucking autistic or something?

>>4181763
That wasn't me you fucking moron. I posted the thread.

'Blatantly obvious sarcasm'... with no fucking conveyance of tone or bodylanguage?

"No one will take seriously" Are you autistic?

Seriously are you fucking retarded or autistic? So far i'm guessing retarded.

>>4181783
>>4181773
Woops...

Connection issues, never notified of post.

>>4181770
>>4181773
>>4181783


and yes, nobody will take this seriously. I guess knowing a tiny bit about logic and how THIS TURNS OUT EVERY TIME makes me autistic.

and yes, if you fucking know how to read, sarcasm is really easy to pull off of something like that.

>can teleport single atoms using lots of energy
doesn't just jump to
>complex molecules jump a few feet
also
>beeping light boxes and space men

how the fuck do you not get that?

>>4181783
>>4181773

>immediately falls into "YOU'RE RETARDED" which is proven to be a great debate strategy
>claims you need body language to read SARCASM

>allofmylulz

>>4181817

No. Not samefag.

Do you ever leave your room? If i assume you are not spastic, then yes the sarcasm does show, however, many people actually think like this.

As i said, you are totally wrong about the samefag shit and 'want' NEVER has one apostrophe therefore, regardless of how witty you may think you are, your sarcasm is NOT obvious.

Assuming that millions of people are not fucking stupid indicates you have insanely poor people skills or you never meet people in the real world.

In fact, the ability to read would indicate that many people take this bullshit seriously.

People actually buy into this shit ALL THE FUCKING TIME... i have heard arguments like the one you made pretty frequently meant in all seriousness by societally judged 'intelligent' people.

As i said, i double-posted because of connection problems which is why i repeated myself... THAT is obvious.

Let's recap.

>I post my rage because some idiot used this link as an argument and i can't believe people actually take this shit seriously.
>You also find this ridiculous yet disbelieve that others take it seriously despite the link and attention this 'scientist' has received.
>You attempt to make a sarcastic comment, however the ambiguity of your comment makes someone else attempt to shoot you down.
>You then confuse said person with OP and proceed to make yourself look like an idiot.

Just quit while you are a little behind matey.

>>4181820
>points out ad hominem fallacy
>uses straw man fallacy

Allmyhypocrisy.jpg

Your picture is one of the most amazing pictures in the history of pictures

>>4181852
>implying a minor typo nullifies entire point
>implying that crazy flat earthers and you constitute "millions of people who take this seriously"
>implying you aren't just cynical about people because you spend way too much time on the internet, and that everyone REALLY IS just a bunch of stupid apes.
>still falling back on lovely "you're retarded" argument
>implying one non-peer reviewed article posted on a shitty site that has nothing to do with science constitutes "lots of attention"
>trying to defend lack of ability to understand/recognize obvious sarcasm as "YEAH WELL YOU'RE JUST DUMB BECAUSE YOU CAN'T WRITE WELL"

*sigh*

>>4181852

waiting for more rage and name calling

you sure do type slow

>>4181883
>>4181883

smbc is god-tier comic

you sir, are a gentleman and a scholar for posting

>>4181745

This whole thread is exemplary of failure. You call yourselves scientists? The only reasonable response is for other independent genetics laboratories to attempt to replicate the experiment. If it doesn't work after many trials, then the DNA transfer was very likely due to an experimental error. If it can be replicated, then we need to explain it and scientific progress is made.

>>4181890
this thread started as that

but then some asshole had to be sarcastic about it, and raging neckbeards with shit arguments descended like carrion.

Thread was lost in a sea of poo-flinging.

>>4181871
I wouldn't have responded to your post at all had you not confused me with whoever it was that had a go at your ambiguity.

Sarcasm (when written) is a literary device... if you are unable to write with even a semblance of cohesion why should anyone assume you are able to employ sarcasm?

>and that everyone REALLY IS just a bunch of stupid apes

Again, this is an example of poor literacy, reinforcing the fact that you would probably be unable to use sarcasm correctly.

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

Yeah... millions is an understatement.

How many people buy into homeopathy? MILLIONS.

How many people bought into cold fusion?
MILLIONS

Stating that a nobel prize winner would not be taken seriously is stupid.

I am drunk, just got back from a Xmas eve party and am winding down on the interbutts so i agree the ad hominem is unnecessary but i will do it anyway. Only came on /sci/ because i figured you people would recognise this bullshit for what it is.

So again...

>You fail at basic syntax/grammar
>You confuse OP with others who think you are an idiot.
>You honestly believe that only a few people believe in pseudoscience.
>You are a cockmunching retard.

>>4181898

lolwat, op went flinging the shit from the get-go, he is as much to blame as the other idiots in the thread. Had op stated, "I don't agree with this and here is why", rather than "DURP THIS FUCKING RETARDED I FUCKING MAD CAUSE I'M EMOTIONALLY STUNTED", we might have had a conversation.

>>4181852

Holy shit you are mad.

Sad, sad motherfucker.

>>4181902

still with the ad hominem

and again, pulling at literary devices does not refute the argument, and cherry picking against the argument as a whole isn't just stupid, it's just a majorly dick thing to do.

you are obviously drunk, probably black out drunk
because, (OH LOOK, AN AD HOMINEM YOU SEEM TO BE SO FOND OF) your arguments are shit, and don't even fucking address anything in mine.

go to bed you fucking retard.
I know i'm done with this fucking parade of idiocy.

>>4181898
Yeah I enjoy arguing for the sake of arguing...

Anyway, just wanted to share this because this 'scientist' is being taken seriously.

And it does make me rage... rage is great when it doesn't land you in prison.

>>4181902

>How many people buy into homeopathy MILLIONS

Thats an unsubstantiated statement.
Since an intelligent human wouldnt commit such an idiotic mistake i dub you the idiot the month.
You fucking lose.
Good day sir.

>>4181902
>>4181902

could you be any madder?

You sir, are the king of lunatics and rage.

>>4181902

>How many people buy into ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

Everyone in this thread needs to calm the fuck down. You're nicer when you act pretentious.

>>4181922
Oh come on man, i have made so may legit mistakes it's not funny. Now you are just trolling.

Google is your friend. Millions of people do literally 'buy' into homeopathy.

>>4181852
>>4181902

I'm not normally one to spout "u mad?" but damn son, you are awfully mad right now.

>>4181936
>>4181936

for someone that is so fond of trying to refer "LOL YOU'RE ARGUMENT IS WRONG BECAUSE THAT WASN'T ME!!"

you don't seem to be able to tell people apart very well.

>>4181924
>Pulling at literary devices does not refute my ability to use literary devices.

Lolwut?

I am more than happy to argue this on substance but so far, all i have is "my sarcasm is great" and "you are wrong because my sarcasm is great" basis...

Fuck me, let this thread die already... using fallacies to fight fallacies with no sense of irony is just boring.

>>4181949

I'm embarrassed for all of us.

>>4181943
Ok, change inflection from 'now' to 'you'.

Never insinuated you were the same person.

http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst?docId=5002276835