/Pol/itical /Sci/ence

[Anonymous No.8593456]

Hello /sci/ I am here to ask a question to something you probably would rather not talk about.

>why does /sci/ hate /pol/ so much?

This hate only seems to go one way, and while I have my speculations, I'd like to hear yours as well.

I believe that one of the underlying reasons to this hate is due to the long-standing habit of science being used for political means, with scientific racism being a prime example of such. The problem I have with this answer though, is that it's intrinsically contradictory; for much of science's practices are deeply rooted in politics for self-preservation (funding) if nothing else. Is /sci/'s disdain of /pol/ a manifestation of a larger conflict? That conflict being an unwanted symbiotic relationship between the scientific community and politics?

Your input on all of this would be greatly valued.

[Anonymous No.8593461]

Go away Nazi.

[Anonymous No.8593477]

>>8593456
>why does /sci/ hate these obnoxious retards who bring their political shit in here?

[Anonymous No.8593489]

>>8593456
The irony is that the only two places I go are /pol/ and /sci/ (with a little bit of /b/)

[Anonymous No.8593528]

>>8593489
This guy gets where I'm coming from
>>8593461
I'm looking to facilitate a discussion, not what you're doing.
>>8593477
Someone could use a mirror

[Anonymous No.8593533]

>>8593456
Mostly because /sci/'s slowly dipped from religion vs science, consciousness, and personal iq threads to having every other thread about iq's of groups of peoples, climate denialism, and why we need to gas the blacks.

I just want to talk about mathematics and pol shitters come in with their uneducated opinions of why the reals don't exist.

[Anonymous No.8593537]

>>8593456
I think it's because people want to discuss science on /sci/ and not as it pertains to politics or ideology. You know, objectively.

[Anonymous No.8593539]

>come to a board dedicated to science and math discussions
>speak of topics related to the science and math (in a lot of cases the "softest" of sciences)
>have very little literacy of either science or math.
>expect /sci/ not to shit on /pol/ whenever they come here.

It's extremely simple, op, racism adside /pol/ on average has no fucking clue about what they talk about outside politics and MAYBE economics (specifically consumer economics and not mathematical models within economics).

[Anonymous No.8593559]

>>8593456
Yes of course it only goes one way, because /sci/ doesn't go shitpost all over /pol/, and even if it did no one would notice since /pol/ is pure shitposts anyway.

Oh except there is plenty of hate in the shitposts from /pol/ themselves. Hate for the facts and methods which shatter their petty little worldviews.

[Anonymous No.8593564]

Climate change denial and anti-vaccine stuff really gets me. I think eugenics could be a legitimate science and I think there is a genetic basis for intelligence, I don't really care about any of that. Why can't you guys be nazis that don't deny science?

[Anonymous No.8593571]

>>8593533
Understandable. But I don't think the aspect of racism will ever go away if the scientific community wants to remain objective with their use of the scientific method. I feel like this is the same for the climate denial-ism/flat earth posters, albeit, I find their arguments less-convincing.

>>8593537
Defining anything that has yet to be quantitatively measured as not science is inherently objective. It would be akin to tossing out the electron cloud probability model for being "too vague".

[Anonymous No.8593582]

>>8593539
>>8593559
>>8593564
So to summarize what you guys are saying: /sci/ hates /pol/ because from what you have seen from /pol/ gives the impression that the majority of the posters there are ignorant, emotionally-charged, "know it all's", who are excessively self-righteous.

Is that an acceptable summation of what you guys are thinking?

[Anonymous No.8593623]

>>8593539
/pol/ lacks any sort of critical thinking skills and always plays the emotional America and Europe is crumbling card every single chance they get. Thats even past their obvious racist agenda.

>B-b-but we like black people like David Clarke
Unless you talk about genuine racist policies enacted to keep minorities and blacks from voting e.g
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/VeaseyOpinion100914.pdf

>your a stupid sub-human nigger
in the eyes of /pol/

[Anonymous No.8593626]

>>8593582
/pol/ is very emotionally charged, despite its protests to the contrary

[Anonymous No.8593658]

>>8593626
I'm not trying to refute this by any means, however I feel to imply that /sci/ isn't emotionally charged, would be less-from-the-truth.

[Anonymous No.8593667]

>>8593456
>>why does /sci/ hate /pol/ so much?
I thought *everyone* hated /pol/. ??

[Anonymous No.8593672]

>>8593582
> /sci/ hates /pol/ because from what you have seen from /pol/ gives the impression that the majority of the posters there are ignorant, emotionally-charged, "know it all's", who are excessively self-righteous.
Close. If they were stupid and over-there, that would be fine.
/pol/ is stupid and keeps coming over-here, and no amount of asking the to fuck off will make them stay away.

[Anonymous No.8593700]

>>8593582
Self righteous? Hardly. No mostly what /sci/ hates is that they try to flood this board with their brand of pseudoscience.

[Anonymous No.8593712]

>>8593672
>/pol/ is stupid and keeps coming over-here, and no amount of asking the to fuck off will make them stay away.

I feel like the reason to why that is is that /sci/ actually puts up a solid argument with valid sources (for the most part). /pol/ can go to /his/ if they just simply wanted to argue with people. /sci/ however will blatantly go out of their way to prove them wrong, which is giving them exactly what they want; a good fight.
I haven't lurked around /his/ too much, but from the few times, I got the impression that they were a bunch of push-overs.