/sci/ - Science & Math

Blackman

Mad Scientist

The Queen.

Resident /sci/ Economist!

>>4633760
>not a popsci transhumanist idiot

>>4633758
0/10

EK

Those juicy thighs are irresistible

>that feel when no gf

EK

>>4633771
>>4633768
this

>>4633765
>tripfag honoring himself

Oh boy, Is this another EK/Tripfag general thread?

MathVent was cool until you faggots made him leave

>>4633761
>>4633768
>>4633771

EK is my waifu.

Me. I always correct the irrational claims made by some people on this board.

MedFag is a pretty cool guy and doesn't afraid of anything

>Watch it turn out to be IQ Fundie who created this thread

It's only the 5000th time we had this thread

https://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/thread/S4458617#p44588464

Good science posters:
CNS
TN5
Psistar
the Emma Stone guy
that one pony fag who knows higher math
Josef

Annoying but not really bad:
MadScientist
Inurdaes
valjean
GL
Pascal
Krakengineer

Shitposters:
EK
Harriet
mathgenius
Carl Sagan
Teacup
the violent simians guy
TheTemplarKnightOfStuffTemperature
Richard Feynmann
Blackman
IQ Fundie
MathVent

EK is a failure. i once beat her/him in a creationism debate a few days ago. the fucker give some shitty arguments after i corner him and finally accepter his defeat. feels good man

pic related, is what he probably thought during that moments...

>>4633805
>Josef
>good

>>4633806
>a few days ago

It's not the real Queen, then.

Anonymous. I swear that cunt posts half the things on this board.

>>4633805
What makes you say that I'm a shitposter?

Mad Scientist. At least his threads are interesting. Also, he’s not trans-humanist; he’s trans-hampsterist. And not a fucking dick.

>>4633810

I had a qualia about it.

>>4633793
>MathVent without trip detected

>>4633807
>Josef
>not original /sci/ user
>didn't help the entire community with Project Rhizome
>didn't help entire community with guides
>didn't help entire community with physics/math homework
>wasn't an all-around cool guy
Really?

>>4633810
You claim the limbic system does not develop emotion and that conscious perception is separate from the brain.

Go fuck yourself.

B-but that describes all of /sci/'s anonymous userbase as well....

>>4633816
I was just looking at Rhizome a couple days ago. Shit god damn that turned into a sizeable project.

That one clandestine chick seems to help every once in a while. at least she isnt like EK and posting wiki all the damn time.

mathfag is cool too.

>>4633816
>posting inane shit barely related to the question at hand
>helping with homework

And you say it as if helping with homework were a good thing.

>>4633805
Nobody remembers me or philosopher.

>Transhumanism, abbreviated as H+ or h+, is an international intellectual and cultural movement that affirms the possibility and desirability of fundamentally transforming the human condition by developing and making widely available technologies to eliminate aging and to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities.

I don't get what's wrong with this. Seems like everyone who ISN'T this would have to be retarded or religious in some way.

The >no gf guy who's a physics student or something

Always cracks me up

>>4633833
>possibility

>>4633831
>>posting inane shit barely related to the question at hand
[citation needed]

>>4633838
>that feel when no gf

>>4633843
That's all Josef ever did.

>>4633833
transhumanists are furfaggots

>>4633833
>affirms the possibility
Yeah, that's the retarded part. We are nowhere even remotely close to even knowing if any of it is possible. It's just deluded popsci hype at this point.

>>4633819
>You claim the limbic system does not develop emotion

I never said this.

>conscious perception is separate from the brain.

Conscious perception is subjective, therefore non-physical. The brain is physical, so yes, conscious perception is separate from the brain.

>>4633840

Are you implying that it's impossible? Because you really have downs if you do.

>>4633846
All of his posts are contributive.

For example:
https://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/thread/S4229131#p4229231
https://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/thread/S4229180#p4229195
https://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/thread/S4213853#p4213923

I don't see how that's "inane shit".

>>4633850
>>>/x/

>>4633848

Are YOU retarded? It's obviously possible. How fucking dumb do you have to be to think that sufficient sophisticated artificial parts couldn't replace organs and do their jobs better and more efficiently? How stupid do you have to be to think that medicine won't keep improving to the point where diseases can't kill us? Have you heard of nanotechnology?

In short, you're a tremendous faggot.

>>4633852
>cherry-picking the only few times he answered in a pseudo-related manner

>>4633854
Are you a fucking troll? He has something like 10k posts here. Go find posts that aren't. I don't have time to paste 5000 links here

>>4633840
>>4633847
>>4633848
>>4633853

>talking snake proponents on /sci/

>>>/x/

>>4633856
>implying

You've obviously never seen him actually post.

Also if you think what he says is in any way clever or correct, it means you don't know what he is actually talking about.

CNS

>>4633848
But that's wrong. Vaccination is an example of human enhancement that is literally practiced on an everyday basis.

>>4633849
>I never said this.
You do not know what qualia is, then.

>Conscious perception is subjective, therefore non-physical. The brain is physical, so yes, conscious perception is separate from the brain.
No, it is not. Conscious experience is considered a loop feedback mechanism from the thalamus to Layer V/VI of the frontal lobe neocortex. It is the collective result of hundreds of millions of simultaneous neuronal firings and self-referentials in said circuit. It is physical.

>>4633859
Ive been here before the imageboard was a thought son.

Ive been around since the textboard. Kill yourself, you are a horrible troll.

>oldfags butthurt that some breakthrough in technology capable of extending lifespans to 2-300 years will happen right after they die

>>4633864
Shut up, Josef. You are the troll.

>>4633860
He never posts.

>durr he typed up a paragraph on fMRI shit that can be found in wikipedia
He's a pretentious asshole.

>>4633863

>You do not know what qualia is, then.

I do. Do you?

>No, it is not. Conscious experience is considered a loop feedback mechanism from the thalamus to Layer V/VI of the frontal lobe neocortex. It is the collective result of hundreds of millions of simultaneous neuronal firings and self-referentials in said circuit. It is physical.

Have you seen consciousness?

>>4633867
I am not Josef, I am an old tripfag though but you'll never guess my trip.

You are the troll. Josef is a contributive poster. You have yet to present evidence showing otherwise besides some petty photo demonstrating he came here drunk once.

>>4633870
I have.

http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2011/09/22/brain-movies/

I can also see brain activity in an MRI. It's very physical.

>>4633873

>Being drunk
>Not knowing the difference between min and inf

>>4633868
how is CNS a pretentious asshole? 0/10

>>4633881
He made a mistake. I'm sure you have made many more. That does not make him a bad poster.

What about physics guy?

>post Einstein pics
>I'm a physicist, AMA
>mocks questions, never answers anything

fucking lol.

>>4633885
Pretentious asshole.

>>4633889
>still mad

>>4633879
You are completely avoiding the topic.
You can see a physical system, but not qualia, because it's non-physical.

>>4633889
Is that your stock response for every tripfriend on here? You seem mad.

>>4633884
It's proof he doesn't know shit about even the most basic of mathematics.

>>4633892

Did you even watch the video you fucking idiot? Holy shit this guy makes me rage.

>>4633892
No, it is not fucking qualia. It's NEURONS firing in loops. As they fire, they modify the conscious experience by moving around charges. The conscious experience is physical, it is the EM field fluctuations that float around collectively in the brain.

>>4633898
I don't think you can be a Physics PhD student without knowledge of mathematics.

>>4633905
psst: you're getting trolled softly by a underagefag

>>4633805
>GL
>Psistar
>Josef

Over half of these people on that list dont even come here anymore

Can someone rewrite this?

>>4633904
>It's NEURONS firing in loops.

Exactly. It's just neurons firing in loops. It doesn't solve the hard problem of consciousness.

>>4633909
Enjoy your ban.

>>4633905
Actually you can, you've obviously never been in a lab.

>>4633918
I don't think you can publish physics without knowledge of math.

I don't think you can pass the physics GRE without knowledge of math.

I don't think you can write an undergrad thesis without knowledge of math.

I don't think you can get accepted to Rutgers without knowledge of math.

MadScientist
Colonel Coffee Mug
Krakengineer
fizd
Inurdaes
Josef
pascal

>>4633921
>he thinks all physics is theoretical physics

>>4633918
Sure, be the physics grad student who doesn't know how much current is flowing through is superconducting sample because he can't even do <span class="math"> V = IR [/spoiler].
(Hint: I've met some which come awfully close to this...)

>>4633916
>It doesn't solve the hard problem of consciousness.
That is the consciousness. The physical portion of it is the disturbances in the electromagnetic field the neurons create by shifting around sodium ions. What is so hard to understand you cunt?

>>4633921
>I don't think you can get accepted to Rutgers without knowledge of math.

princeton phd student here. i lol'd.

>>4633921
>I don't think you can publish physics without knowledge of math.
>I have never seen a real paper

Here, let me link one for you: http://jap.aip.org/resource/1/japiau/v98/i6/p066103_s1

Oh, sorry, your high school doesn't have access to journals? Too bad.

>>4633932
Fuck off, Ice or whatever the fuck your tripcode is.

Fucking pretentious asshole

>>4633926
0/100

>>4633927
I don't believe you.

>>4633934
>I don't believe you.
LALALALALALAICANTHEARYOULALALALALA

>>4633934
>Fuck off, Ice or whatever the fuck your tripcode is.
>Fucking pretentious asshole
no idea who "Ice" is, i've only posted with a tripcode as "OP" in ask-a-phd-candidate threads.

>>4633933
if you don't know math, you don't know how x-ray diffraction works, and if you don't know how your experimental tools work in your lab, you have no business publishing scientific papers.

>>4633933
I'm an undergrad, you faggot.

>JAP
I lol'd.

I don't understand how this relates to me defending Josef.

>>4633930
It seems you don't have any knowledge on this topic.

>>4633939
>if you don't know math, you don't know how x-ray diffraction works

Lucky thing there is code to do all the work for you.

>>4633939
>if you don't know math, you don't know how x-ray diffraction works, and if you don't know how your experimental tools work in your lab
We aren't all studying condensed matter, I hope you know.

>>4633942
>>JAP
>I lol'd.

>one of the most prestigious journals

But of course, being a retarded undegrad, you don't know shit about that.

>>4633953
we aren't all "studying" at shitshow universities bloating journals with terrible "research" either, fortunately.

>>4633947
It seems like you're a terrible philosopher who doesn't understand how neuronal networks work.

http://www.cell.com/trends/cognitive-sciences/fulltext/S1364-6613(11)00190-2
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Models_of_thalamocortical_system
http://willcov.com/bio-consciousness/front/Thalamocortical%20system.htm
http://www.amazon.com/Am-Strange-Loop-Douglas-Hofstadter/dp/0465030785
http://books.google.com/books?id=QAo2EPXbR8kC&pg=PA155&lpg=PA155&dq=consciousness+in+fro
ntal+lobe&source=bl&ots=gfb1peUv5T&sig=8WdPQYCJF8R4w9jr4TDB2lUIGPU&hl=en&sa=X&am
p;ei=wIROT4zXO8agiQKIiP2mCw&ved=0CGIQ6AEwCjgK#v=onepage&q=consciousness%20in%20frontal%20lob
e&f=false
http://users.phhp.ufl.edu/rbauer/Human_HCF_06/frontal_HCF_06.pdf

>>4633955
>applied physics
>prestigious
Pick one.

i love big black cocks

>>4633947
Always resorting to Ad hominem when you have nothing left to say eh?

I don't think you know anything at all about how the brain works

>>4633966

If you are going to impersonate me using my trip to troll, at least do it properly.

>>4633962

So, how does qualia arises from neuronal networks?

>>4633961
>bloating journals with terrible "research"
What exactly is the relevance of this? You know what Josef has published?

I'm a Berkley grad student, FYI.

>>4633964
Go back to jerking off to your pointless group theory and bullshit like that while the real physicist actually do something useful for a change.

>>4633976
First, define 'qualia'.

>>4633978
it was directed at the gentleman that claims (i'm assuming he's just trolling) a physics phd student/researcher "doesn't need to know math" because he can "work in a lab" and have someone else's code do all the math.

the specific of journal/research bloat is pretty well known in academia...

>>4633986
Typical ass-devastated experimentalist scum

EK
Joseph (where is he nowadays)
Mad Scientist (living the dream)
Medfag (his best stuff is on /adv/ and he helped me when I wasn't sure I was supposed to go to the doctor.)

That's all that comes to mind.

Deep&Edgy and IQ Fundie are the worst kind of people.... period.

>>4633934 referring to >>4633927
They were totally incompetent when it came to the electronics they were using for their experiments, how to use proper shielding / grounding, etc. Not quite as bad as not knowing V=IR, but pretty awful...

>>4633999
>They were totally incompetent when it came to the electronics they were using for their experiments, how to use proper shielding / grounding, etc

Sounds like theoretical physicists.

>>4634007
I wish, I wish... they were grad students working in an experimental condensed matter physics group.

>>4633999
You think that's bad? I once walked in on a group of three people looking baffled at a signal on an oscilloscope and trying to figure out why it looked like that.

Turns out they forgot to plug in the voltage source to start the rest of the apparatus.

you fucking wankerfucks

>>4633805
>CNS
Never posts, has pseudoknowledge gained from Wikipedia.

>TN5
Doesn't post anymore, trolled Putnam threads and couldn't do basic babby Analysis.

>Psistar
Pretentious asshole.

the Emma Stone guy
Pretentious asshole.

>that one pony fag who knows higher math
Pretentious asshole.

>Josef
Pretentious asshole who doesn't know shit.

>>4634033
So there isnt any good tripfag on /sci/?

>>4634033
I don't understand how any of those people fit your descriptions...

>>4634042
> So there isnt any good tripfag on /sci/?

I'd trip, but I've been told (and it seems most probable) that I can then be filtered out by FAGGOTS running some Firefox add-in. I don't post here just so some /sci/tard FAGGOTS can filter me the fuck out. I post here to be HEARD, and to OBLITERATE all the stupid biases of the so-called educated class.

>>4634070
Were you Carl Sagan?

best thread on /sci/

Blackman

>>4633793
I'm still here, just not much time recently and not really interested in recent postings here. I've been answering some math threads anonymously though.

>>4633754

EK

The ponyfag seems to know what hes talking about

>EK
>shit poster and troll
Pick both.

>>4633805
What? I don't even make the list anymore? So sad...

meeeeeeeeeeee!

>>4634796
You haven't been posting much lately. You don't even show up to defend moral realism anymore.

>>4634816
>defend moral realism
I really don't like it in those terms.

I did show up to that Sam Harris thread recently. A couple days ago or a week or so.

I post a lot anonymously.

>>4634822
Err, to be clear, I don't claim "objective morality exists" or some such. In fact, I don't recognize a workable meaning of the phrase "objective morality". It's just something that "divine command theory" idiots state.

As a matter of facts, everyone, minus a few sociopaths, agrees that we ought to lessen the suffering of conscious creatures and promote the well-being of conscious creatures, and all moral claims reduce down to claims of suffering and well-being.

As an unjustified moral assertion, I assert that we ought to lessen suffering and promote well-being, and I deny moral claims that do not reduce down to suffering and well-being.

>>4633913
I'm still here (one of those on your list) but I quit being a tripfag because look at what people say about josef, who gave some of his time for /sci/ and can't even get credit from a good part of them. I still try to contribute though.

>>4634834
It's mostly just a few butthurt asshats who like to shit on everything good. This is why we cannot have nice things. When they say the tripfag is pretentious, they're just projecting.

/sci/ acting like kinder gardeners

>>4634830
> I don't recognize a workable meaning of the phrase "objective morality"
Fair enough. I can't conceive of a workable meaning of this either, though:
>we ought to lessen the suffering of conscious creatures and promote the well-being of conscious creatures
This is what annoys me about Harris' ideas as well. "Suffering" and "well-being" are used as if they had definitive, universally applicable meanings, even though they're just as subjective and relative to the individual as morals in general. I may not respond to a negative stimulus with as much "suffering" as you, rendering this whole empirical approach proposed by Harris no less arbitrary and relative as any other moral system.

That aside, though, I really fucking hate consequentialism, and it kinda rubs me the wrong way that, in Harris' system, we'd use science to justify it.

>>4634830
>>4634857

Would it be so bad to claim there is an objective morality? I mean in your opinion is that like auto-retard to believe that?

>>4633868
>He never posts.
>>4634033
>Never posts
That's just not true.

>>4633760
>>4633811
>>4633996

>>4634878
Weren't you v& irl for copying pedo-bear?

EK is the Yoko Ono of /sci/.

>>4634879

No

>>4634869
>Would it be so bad to claim there is an objective morality?
Well, I think it would be an incorrect and indefensible claim, but I'd still like to hear your reasoning.

>I mean in your opinion is that like auto-retard to believe that?
No, I can think of quite a few intelligent moral realists, Harris included. I just don't find their arguments in any way convincing.

>>4634882
Oh ok, I guess those install gentoo archives must have been talking about some other tripfag named mad scientist who likes being a pedo huh?

>>4634887

At one point I briefly dated a 17 year old (I was 24) which is creepy but not illegal. Then, everyone who hated the comic or tripfags in general started spreading a rumor that I was a pedophile based on that.

>>4634883

I think about morality a lot, and I have typically understood (like many people) that morality is chosen. Through out history there has been a great diversity of ethical theories, and they cant all be right. What is really comes down to is people choosing what is right and wrong. Maybe not even that, maybe people just sort of drifting around morality making decisions on the fly.

This leads me to believe in some kind of moral relativism. There is nothing absolute, its just up to us to choose what we are going to believe in, and so many people just go with utilitarianism, I suspect because its so simple and straight forward (which I think is a bit of a trap, but thats a seperate argument).

But I think this whole perception of relativism is misleading. If we choose our morality, than we must have a criteria for choosing it. Any criteria must be a moral statement. If you like utilitarianism then perhaps its because its simple and you a-priori think simple things are good. It is impossible to choose your morality, because choice implies morality.

I am thinking, there must be something fundamental and absolute about morality. It cant just be some social construct. It might not be universal, it might not be objective in the scientific sense of the word. But, whatever it is it must be real innate feature in people.

If you dont recognize that morality is real, and is instead some social construct we get to ponder about, then there will always be a dichotomy between how people behave, and how people SHOULD behave. That to me, seems like an irreconcilable barrier.

I don't troll, don't shitpost and am not a popsci idiot. What do I win, OP?

>>4634889

Your encyclopedia dramatica page claims you dated a 15 year old.

>>4634893


Hello friend.

>>4633833
People who dislike transhumanism, either haven't read much about it, are religious, are anti-science, or some combination of these.

>>4634896
>Your encyclopedia dramatica page claims you dated a 15 year old.

It also claims Steve Jobs used to give out gay handjobs to his favorite employees. ED is not Wikipedia.

>>4634899

Yeah I know. I am just saying.

>>4633868
>>durr he typed up a paragraph on fMRI shit that can be found in wikipedia
http://chanarchive.org/4chan/sci/39508/bridging-the-gap-between-statistical-physics-and-neuroscience

>>4634901

Oh trust me, I knew. If you check the section that shows who contributed to it, "CalvinAndHobbes" is one of my more recent exes. The breakup was ugly and writing the bit about how I want to fuck my cousin was part of her petty internet revenge. That, and submitting my photo to a number of LGBT fetish websites.

Remember back when people who didn't like you would just key your car or some shit?

>>4633806
wat the fuck are you even talking about?
do you mean this?
https://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/thread/S4626004#p4626304
because thats hardly a 'debate' and that guy was a fucking troll
so if thats you, then fuck you!

what

>>4634892
>There is nothing absolute, its just up to us to choose what we are going to believe in, and so many people just go with utilitarianism, I suspect because its so simple and straight forward (which I think is a bit of a trap, but thats a seperate argument).
Totally agree.

>It is impossible to choose your morality, because choice implies morality.
Well, I guess you can't freely choose your morality just like you can't freely choose your genuine religious beliefs. If something, whether it's an ethical principle, a faith claim, or even just a logical argument, is more compelling to you than its counter-position, then you have little choice but to accept it. However, I don't think this lack of truly free choice indicates an objective, external moral standard, considering that the personal acceptance of a moral principle is still dependent on purely subjective evaluation. My "This sounds morally just to me" may be your "This sounds utterly reprehensible to me".

FIELD TOO LONG

>>4634965
>If you dont recognize that morality is real, and is instead some social construct we get to ponder about, then there will always be a dichotomy between how people behave, and how people SHOULD behave. That to me, seems like an irreconcilable barrier.
My main problem with your point here is that it sounds like an appeal to adverse consequences, which I wouldn't consider to be of any value when trying to determine the actual truthfulness of a claim. I mean, the problems and uncomfortable dilemmas of moral relativism are undeniably there, but I don't see how their existence validate moral realism.

>I am thinking, there must be something fundamental and absolute about morality.
Well, for the sake of common ground, I do believe that morals are a fundamental part of human cognition, and I certainly do reckon that it's generally beneficial for a society to derive at least some aspects of their norms and rules from their moral commons. My position is just that those commons should always be subject to re-evaluation and refinement, because they are not absolute.

cognitively-impaired popsci transhumanist idiot here

at least I contribute OC

>>4634965

>However, I don't think this lack of truly free choice indicates an objective, external moral standard, considering that the personal acceptance of a moral principle is still dependent on purely subjective evaluation

I guess objective really isnt the right word. Maybe absolute is a better term. There an absolute subjective mechanism at work that is creating morality. Regardless of its objectivity/subjectivity its a constant force that cannot be questioned (or so I am speculating).

>My "This sounds morally just to me" may be your "This sounds utterly reprehensible to me".

Sure. Although I would prefer to hope that there is something a bit more universal about people. But even if there wasnt I think that would suggest there is a clash of subjective moral principals at work sifting around among people.

>My main problem with your point here is that it sounds like an appeal to adverse consequences

I see, yeah you are right. That is not really an argument. I guess I could just simplify what I am saying to the following.

No amount of choice avoids the existence of a moral criteria, which suggests that moral criteria precede moral decisions. If you are going to believe in a certain moral criteria, it must be because there is some force within you that you cannot reckon with, and not because you simply "chose" that morality.

>Well, for the sake of common ground, I do believe that morals are a fundamental part of human cognition, and I certainly do reckon that it's generally beneficial for a society to derive at least some aspects of their norms and rules from their moral commons.

I agree. I cant say anything for sure, but I bet the idea of mutual respect is some innate morality. Something like: I wont harm you if you dont harm me.

>>4634878
>>4633760
>>4633811
>>4633996
samefag

>>4635001

You should share with us what it is like to be a closeted homosexual.

Anal.Chem. Is pretty cool.

>>4635026

Yeah... pretty cool... If you are a jerk!!! What I would do to punch him in the face right now!! you wouldnt happen to see where he went would'ya?

er, he went that way.

pascal

Josef.

Read this, guys.

https://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/reports/availability
https://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/reports/post-count

i feel like i shouldn't be here

TN5 even though I haven't seen him for a while,
mathfag,
psistar,
mad scientist.

Not an exhaustive list.

>>4634889
Fuck you you piece of shit. First you rape an underage girl then you come on here to rape hamsters. All of your seabro threads are you samefagging

Worst tripfag on the board at least EK or Blackman isnt a pedophile

>>4634889
well, you make lots of threads
and you know what they say about familiarity.

CNS

Every other answer is incorrect and you should all feel bad

IQ Fundie gets an honorable mention though because he's extremely good at concealing the fact he's a troll.

How do I become a better tripcode user?

>>4635274
Mad Scientist is among the worst. In fact he is what's wrong with this board. He has not even basic knowledge of science and his threads are solely centered around childish role playing and fantasy crap. He's among the reasons why /sci/ is full of underageb&s.

>>4635312
He's also a pedophile.

Please do not forgot that he is a pedophile.

>>4635321
That would actually be a point in his favour.

>>4635274
I have good hopes that TN5 was assimilated into anon. He has, on several occasions, hinted at doing so.
Also, sage, because not math or science.

>>4635312
>>4635321
I suppose you and all other faggots read this

http://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/?task=search&ghost=yes&search_text=%22bob+averill%22

>>4635204

Pascal is a bro.

>>4635250

Interesting statistics. Thanks.

>>4635324
>raping underage teenager
>point in his favour

http://encyclopediadramatica.se/Bob_Averill
http://www.portlandmercury.com/portland/Content?oid=84436&category=22101
http://www.facebook.com/bob.averill

>>4635330
>implying you aren't TN5 samefagging without trip

EK and Harriet are the worst by far. IQ fundie is a close runner up, but I think the defining difference is that he is actually capable of feeling shame.

>>4635342
>samefagging
>one post
right

Worst tripfag?

https://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/?task=search2&ghost=&search_text=&search_subject=&
amp;search_username=le+oldfag&search_tripcode=&search_datefrom=&search_dateto=&searc
h_del=dontcare&search_int=dontcare&search_ord=new&search_res=post

>>4635339
>had consensual sex with a 15 year old girl
>raped underage teenager
>pedophile
You just gave a list of three mutually exclusive things, that you claim that he is.

>>4635352
Harriet is the worst personality, EK is far better.

>>4635339
It's bad because God said so.

>>4635362
Fuck off. We don't want your pedo garbage talk here.

>>4635363
Harriet is funny as long as you're not the one getting trolled by her.

>>4635367
There is nothing funny about seeing off-the-scale levels of autism.

>>4635370
>he thinks that's real autism
>he doesn't see how hard he's getting trolled
>he's an autist himself

have i already been forgotten?

>>4635372
Forgotten? Whoever you are, nobody ever gave a fuck.

>>4635371
dude your totaly autist bro

>>4635366
That's the big issue isn't it.
Even making a neutral remark about people misusing definitions makes one a pedophile in some peoples views.
Even the law recognizes the difference between statutory rape and rape.
Is there, to you, no difference between a 22 year old having consensual sex with a 15 year old, and a 40 year old man raping a 7 year old girl? To me, there is a huge difference between the two, and I don't want them to be mixed up. Hence, I am consistent and correct in my definitions.

>>4635366
>defining someone to be wrong
Get out of /sci/.

>>4635375
>projecting his autism

>>4635376
There is no fucking difference. You are sick and you know it.

>>4635380
>and you know it
lrn2rational

>>4635380
>There is no fucking difference.
In my country, one of them's perfectly legal.

>>4635380
2/10, you had a good run, but now you blew your cover

>>4635386
I know there are some third world countries without laws. That doesn't make it less disgusting, immoral and unacceptable.

>>4635391
What the fuck, man? How is it trolling to despise a goddamn pedophile?

>>4635396
its trolling to say that fucking a 15 year old is pedophilia, its not. its hebephilia.

>>4635403
No difference. Stop making up words to euphemize the most disgusting perversion.

>>4635408
there is something wrong with the girls you know if they are 15 and haven't reached puberty yet.

Josef

>>4635408

Being physically attracted to a sexually mature 15 year old is normal.

Now if you're also attracted to their personalities and want to watch MLP while ass fucking them, you probably have issues of your own.

>>4635396
>I know there are some third world countries without laws.
Your jelly is showing.

>>4635408
>A is bad, B is bad, therefore B cannot be worse than A
That is the error that we are pointing out. We are not arguing that A is not bad. Just that B is a lot worse. And as such, we should not consider A and B as the same.
(A is 22yo and 15yo, B is 40yo and 7yo.)

>>4635419
>>4635426
>>4635427
>>4635433
I know this is 4chan and we have a lot of wannabe trolls and unfortunately even some real pedophiles here, but in all seriousness: If you have sex with someone below the age of 18, this is pedophilia and for good reason it's considered a crime in all civilized countries. No further discussion needed.

Jenny is pretty cool....


Right guys?


Right?

>>4635451
Who?

>>4635370
harriet isnt autistic

>>4635456
Jennie!NSPcQQMvS.

>>4635456

>>4635465
Of course Harriet isn't autistis. Harriet is a troll.

>>4635466
>reddit picture

Fuck off.

>>4635465
You are right, Harriet is autism personified, saying she's just autistic is an understatement.

>>4635477
>still getting easily trolled by Harriet

>tripfags

EK is the worst. She doesn't even know how the human penis works.

>>4635444
>If you have sex with someone below the age of 18, this is pedophilia and for good reason it's considered a crime in all civilized countries.
No and no.

>No further discussion needed.
This we can agree on. It's an american website, and we will obey american laws here. No discussion about that.

>>4635444
>gives no reason for opinion
>gets definition of pedophilia wrong
>think age of consent is 18

really? are you trolling or just misinformed?

why do you hold that opinion? why do you consider only America, Bhutan, Burundi, Kazakhstan, Pakistan and Rwanda as civilized countries and why do you apply pedophilia to people who are already past puberty?

>>4635475
forever_alone originated on 4chan, reddit stole it.

most of our memes migrate over there

>>4635477
nah, im pretty sure shes not autistic.
maybe a little introverted, but shes fairly normal.

>>4635483
fuck you faggot.
https://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/thread/S4607423#p4608006

I like it how the fake IQ fundie ITT managed to perfectly adopt my style.

>>4635444
you're probably a troll, but pedophillia is pecifically for children who havent reached puberty yet.
wanting to fuck 14 year old is 'hebephilia' which is not quite as bad (still illegal in most countries)

>If you have sex with someone below the age of 18, this is pedophilia and for good reason it's considered a crime in all civilized countries.
age of consent in the UK is 16, not 18
and it is in a lot of the states as well

>>4635444
Actually pretty much only third world countries like the US have AoC set at 18.

>>4635444
>If you have sex with someone below the age of 18, this is pedophilia
No
If you have sex with someone below the age of 18, this might be considered statutory rape in parts of the US.
That is not the same statement.
And recall the beginning of the discussion.
You claimed that he raped a minor, and was a pedophile. Neither needs to be true.
Pedophilia applies to prepubescent girls, and rape implies that the girl did not consent (she likely did, but she was simply not considered capable of giving consent).
Why must everything be black and white?

>>4635485
>No and no.
Yes and yes. Stop justifying that mental illness of yours. You need treatment.

>>4635487
Don't even try to argue it. If you don't see why pedophilia is wrong, then you're pretty sick.

>>4635491
*specifically

>>4635491
>>4635494
>>4635499
This has nothing to do with age of consent or puberty being reached. If you want to have sex with minors (i.e. under the age of 18), you are a pedophile and need treatment. Or better you should be put in prison, since you're probably resistant to any form of treatment.

>>4635499
>Why must everything be black and white?

Because God wills it.

>>4635499
>Why must everything be black and white?reported for racism.

>>4635499
This.

However, it cannot be argued, despite the possible consentual circumstances, sex has the potential to leave life-long traumas if one of the partners is heavily influencing the other or initiates the situation via a ruse etc.

>>4635507
>God

Fuck off, creationfag. This is an atheist board.

>>4635506
fucking troll/retard, pick one, i dont care

most people first have sex before they're 18, therefore by your logic most people are 'pedophiles who need treatment or to be put in prison'

fucking idiot

>>4635511
all boards are atheist boards
..except perhaps /x/

>>4635508
>implying black and white are the only races

You're the racist for not accepting yellow, red and green as races.

>>4635511
The autism is great in this one.

>>4635506
Still not sure if troll.

If you want to make statements about pedophilia, educate yourself about pedophilia beforehand.
While your objective to protect other people seems noble at first, your stubborness will be nonbeneficial when trying to find solutions for a real problem.

>>4635519
Damn right. Our degenerate society needs to be purged.

>>4635532
puberty is like up to 5 years before that, even more sometimes
theres no reason to arbitrarily wait 5 years for no reason if you want to have sex.

>>4635511
>god
>therefore creationfag
No.

While I do not agree with the "anti-pedo anon" and his thought process, I think it's important we do not commit fallacies of the same magnitude.
Also, the way "God wills it" was posted was clearly sarcastic.

>>4635506
why 18? name one reason for the age to be 18. it has no significance, its already past puberty, but your frontal lobe isnt completely developed yet, so why? can you answer that?

>>4635531
I got it right all the time. Don't let yourself be deceived by these weirdos making up new words to justify their sickness.

>>4635534
Sex was never meant to be for fun. Reproduction is serious business and requires mental maturity.

>>4635538
If you believe in god, you're a fucking retard .This is scientific fact.

stay classy, /sci/

>>4635539
See >>4635541

>>4635545
>i hate all of you.jpg

>>4635541
most people dont want kids (or at least not while still young)
so it IS for fun, in most cases
i presume you're anti-contraception then?

>>4635541
Except you can have sex without reproducing.

All the benefits without the downsides.

>>4635540
Just repeating it won't make it true. Just read anything about it, from american law to a lexicon.

But since you're a troll, my words are in vain...

>>4635556
Don't you see how degenerate and anti-evolutionary it is to intentionally engage in the act of reproduction without intending to reproduce?

>>4635541
1) but at 18 you arnt mentally mature. thats at 23.
2) reproduction doesn't need mental maturity, only the maturity of the body, at 12.

>>4635561
sex isnt 'the act of reproduction' unless when you do it the female actually gets pregnant, which is rare even if you're trying for a baby.
people do it for fun, and then without contraception a pregnancy just MIGHT happen.

>>4635560
>pedophile calls me troll for telling him how sick he is
Seriously?

>>4635564
Some people never reach mental maturity. Probably the age of 18 was chosen because it coincides with completing the first level of fundamental education in most countries.

>>4635571
Did you read what I posted? Did you understand it? Obviously not.

>>4635561
>>4635544
Gentlemen, we have a multi-layered troll approach here.
It has proven quite effective.

>>4635572
>somebody who doesn't know what pedophilia is calls other poeple pedophiles
Seriously?

>>4635588
0/10

You're a shit tier troll.

>>4635506
>This has nothing to do with age of consent or puberty being reached. If you want to have sex with minors (i.e. under the age of 18), you are a pedophile and need treatment. Or better you should be put in prison, since you're probably resistant to any form of treatment.

This is a crazy belief. Pedofilia is sexual desires for pre-puberty children. Not this propaganda advocated by "save the children" groups.

"As a medical diagnosis, pedophilia, or paedophilia, is defined as a psychiatric disorder in adults or late adolescents (persons age 16 or older) typically characterized by a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger, though onset of puberty may vary). The prepubescent child must be at least five years younger than the adolescent before the attraction can be diagnosed as pedophilia.[1][2][3][4]"

First section on Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_rape
Statutory rape laws for pubescent children are nuts (pun intended :D), and also damaging. Age differences between sexual partners around that age is quite normal. Females mature faster than males, so one wud expect to see females go for older males based solely on that (which they also do).

>>4635592
I quote:
"This has nothing to do with age of consent or puberty being reached. If you want to have sex with minors (i.e. under the age of 18), you are a pedophile and need treatment"

This statement is wrong. You were told that numerous times.
See here for the correct definition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/448575/pedophilia

Your denial up to this point almost leaves the sole conclusion that you are either willfully ignorant or trolling.