/sci/ - Science & Math

go back to reddit

>>7648553
Eh, it's not so bad, /tv/ is so much worse.

>>7648553
It's not just /sci/. The fallout from GG scattered them all over. Notice the amount of second stickies-- /k/, /lit/, /biz. All specifically mentioning /pol/. When m00t took the gloves off, especially during the double4 raid and the "trigger warning" period, the /pol/lacks nearly panicked. Suddenly they discovered there are a bunch more boards than /b/.

4chan always settles into an equilibrium. It might take months or a year, but eventually, it all goes back to its normal self.

They're always banned by the mods or /sci/ just scares them away by using facts and sources. Its one of the few boards where /pol/ actually stays away. You get a few assholes but generally they return to their containment cave.

>>7648576
MOOT nuking /pol/ was his way of saying FUCK YOU 4chan before leaving. I loved that he named it /kekold/ central for a few days.

>>7648553
>80-IQ assclowns
Seems like they'll fit right in with the rest of /sci/ then.

>>7648584
Even though it kinda fucked over the other boards, it was really, really funny seeing /pol/'s little echo chamber get so thoroughly trolled.

Half of sci is retarded anyways.

Just look at that block and tackle thread. People are fucking dumb here. Don't pretend like this is some hort of knowledge.

>>7648589
/pol/ getting trolled was the icing on the cake. But they are closeted gays who love to talk about big black dicks and watching them fuck women or guys.

>>7648553
There is shared ground between boards you know.

A discussion about climate change for example covers both political and scientific ground.

>>7648596
>Half of sci is retarded anyways
>Half
>Not all
M8, I think you maybe retarded.

>>7648612
That one namefag who's always talking about homotopy seems pretty smart.

> IQ threads are made by /pol/
> reddit haters are all from /pol/
> Making an IQ thread is equivalent to Nazi occupation.

We need a new /schi/zophrenia board for these retards who see nazis everywhere they look. I love talking about intelligence and IQ and I've been accused of being a pollack for countles times for fuck knows why.

We were having very nice and decent discussions before these retards came and try to censor every thread they don't like for being a nazi propaganda. The only invasion I see is you from GOBAKTOPOL:D stormers.

IQ threads are about intelligence and psychology, not politics. And no matter how hard you cry, you won't change this simple fact.

Report OP for relentlessly storming /sci/ with this bullshit and lets end this autism.

>>7648692
>muh catgrees

I agree, /pol/lacks should keep to their own board.

>>7648705
Because IQ threads and academic dick measuring have nothing to do with math or science, and are literally the cancer of this board.

>>7648705
IQ is not a serious topic in science. It hasn't been in a few decades. Usually the people who start IQ threads on /sci/ are from /pol/. The main problem with IQ is that its based on the premise that intelligence is fixed. Recent research on the brain has proven that to be false. Neuroplasticity dictates your brain loses and gains intelligence as if its a muscle. It does resonate with the old Greek saying, education is the key to preventing old age.

>>7648725

Nothing justifies trying to censor a thread based on this bullshit. IQ not being a serious subject doesn't make it not-science. If you don't enjoy IQ threads, hide them and move on. Flooding the thread with GOBACKTOPOL spam is against the rules and annoys the shit out of everyone including the people who actually want to learn about IQ. I mean just look at OP. He claims that IQ threads are a form of invasion. Only thing hes missing is a tinfoil hat.

I frequent several boards, amongst then pol, fit, sci, int. I infrequently visit b, r9k, or x, usually for laughs.

This isn't your secret clubhouse op, and I'm probably about 115 IQ, so hug a nut.

>>7648733
IQ is not a science topic. Its a pop-psychology topic. Scientists don't have a quantified system for intelligence. We don't know what creates intelligence in our own-selves. The answers vary from language, math, art, and writing. There is recent research that says that mimicking is what created our intelligence. Its based off research of the guy at UCSD head of neuroscience.

>>7648747

Then you have to say that instead of spamming the same shit in every thread. The original IQ tests are designed to measure ones ability to find and solve patterns, which is how we learn things. I'm sure there are lots of other factors as what makes intelligence, but this is undeniably one of them.
Btw these are the IQ tests based on primitive shapes and not linguistics. They are based on cultural backgrounds and not really a global indicator.

>>7648759
I'm not OP. Also the pattern tests were never conclusive. No IQ tests were in the long run. They came back to teh same conclusion. It was based off if your parents paid a tutor to help you pass the test. So the IQ test were flawed from the start with a preconceive bias.

>>7648763
School tests are also inconclusive by your definition. People can retake the same exams and score much higher or lower so they shouldn't account for anything. But the results of those exams are what dictates either we graduate or drop out.

>>7648553
>WROOORARARRARRAHAHAHAHAH
I FUCKING LOST IT. I can see a fat, sweaty neckbeard screaming at their computer.

> yet another non-sci ihatepol thread
thanks reddit