/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10300869]

Chris Langan, the man with the highest IQ in America, has spoken on anthropogenic climate change, and he says it's bullshit. Your thoughts?

[Justin Jack No.10300872]

get on top with this: https://www.boardresult.website/results/pec-5th-class-result.html

[Anonymous No.10300882]

>>10300869
>"""the man with the highest IQ in America""" singlehandedly debunks the scientific consensus on climate change by noting it was pretty chilly this winter

[Anonymous No.10300894]

You wouldn't ask a geologist for expert opinions on particle physics. Why would you expect an armchair metaphysicist to have an informed opinion on climate science?

[Anonymous No.10300900]

>>10300894
Because he is smarter than you, and has the same access to data, if not more, than you, thus his conclusions hold weight.

[Anonymous No.10300903]

>>10300894
Because he has an extremely high IQ. Even if you don't believe in the Mega Test, he's confirmed 160+ IQ on the WAIS administered by a clinical neuropsychologist.

[Anonymous No.10300911]

>>10300869
you mean "the man who showed IQ isn't everything", go listen to some of his interviews

[Anonymous No.10300980]

>>10300900
>>10300903
He is actually incredibly stupid, as evidenced by his complete lack of understanding of climatology and his gullible repetition of the dumbest denier memes. Further proving that IQ is not the same thing as intelligence.

[Anonymous No.10300988]

>>10300869
iq is a meme

[Anonymous No.10301718]

>>10300869
bump

[Anonymous No.10301727]

>>10300869
Just because he's smart doesn't mean he's right. Look at Elon musk with ai, the dude doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. He programmed an online banking app not a fucking neural net.

[Anonymous No.10301777]

dude's just pandering and taking sides to pledge allegiance to the audience best suited for his persona/platform. climate change debate is a team sport at this point.

he's a public figure whose audience is manchildren caught up in validation traps, obsessed with high scores and being "the best." lot of overlap with redpill/conservative contrarian types. they eat this shit up, and it will only improve his standing/exposure with that crowd.

[Anonymous No.10301783]

>>10300869
Lmao, he doesn't even understand climatology.

[Anonymous No.10301888]

>>10301777
Truthquads right fucking Here

[Anonymous No.10301903]

>>10301888
>quads

[Anonymous No.10302015]

>>10301903
Yes, quads, just like the ones he has

[Anonymous No.10302730]

>>10301777
Wasn't expecting such a reasoned response. Good to see this site isn't completely composed of brainlets

[Anonymous No.10302738]

>>10302015
that's trips and you know it

[Anonymous No.10302745]

Even if you are a proponent of AGW, which I partly agree with, you can't dump endless CO2 with no effects, surely you can see he is 100% correct about it being used as a front for massive taxation and "carbon credits" that will NEVER EVER be used to actually help the planet and just get skimmed off the top by the mega rich.

[Anonymous No.10302761]

>>10302745
Facts

[Anonymous No.10302771]

>>10302730
So clever, changing up your typing style to reply to yourself, no one will ever know you patted yourself on the back.

[Anonymous No.10302808]

He's correct about the money grab and may be partially correct about humans being the cause. The constant "its man-made" implies its solely man-made.

[Anonymous No.10302831]

>>10300869

Since when was IQ score a substitute for actual authority and knowledge on a subject

[Anonymous No.10302848]

>>10301727
What!!!?? How could you possibly assume this....

[Anonymous No.10302852]

>>10300869
Chris Langan's prose is trash

[Anonymous No.10302857]

>>10302852
t. bitter IQlet

[Anonymous No.10302972]

>>10300900
he still thinks santa claus is real
wtf
why do you think he is smart?

[Tuba Jam No.10302984]

>>10302848
Any human driver would hit the walls, so that's obviously meant for at least partially self-driving cars. Remind me, which company has the most cars with rudimentary assisted driving technology?

[Anonymous No.10303070]

>>10302972
>he still thinks santa claus is real
you’re kidding right?

[Anonymous No.10303088]

why should I listen to Langan he doesn't even have the PHENOTYPE ashkenazi women CRAVE

[Anonymous No.10303090]

>>10303088
>when some uneducated autist uses the word "phenotype" in a conversation at work

[Anonymous No.10303135]

>>10300869
As far as his post, he doesn't seem like he's interested in dissecting the issue rather than spout his opinion without backing it up. Perhaps I missed a post?
>>10300900
personality also factors into the equation. If he feels everyone is dumber than he or that he's a special snowflake renegade that has to have a different opinion because he notices that one mistake that makes your entire point weaker (which is me in a nutshell).

I'm perfectly fine with him disagreeing with often imperfect climate science, but it sounds like he doesn't want to play devil's advocate just in case it might be true (because what if it's true?) because he's too proud and cocky. Therefore his opinions may very well be detrimental to future generations.

[Anonymous No.10303141]

>>10302745
Yeah, about that, it's kinda funny isn't it? "Hey, I'm the government and driving is bad for the environment, therefore I'll take a bribe for every liter of oil you use. Feel free to keep driving!"

Of course, I get why, it's the economy stupid and so on, but it's still funny.

[Anonymous No.10303144]

>>10300869
Dont you mean “the man most famously known for being both wrong and a failure despite his high IQ”?

[Anonymous No.10303197]

>>10301777
pls dont trigger them

[Anonymous No.10303199]

>>10300903
>he's confirmed 160+ IQ on the WAIS administered by a clinical neuropsychologist
[citation needed]

[Anonymous No.10303373]

>>10300869
Imagine unironically making the "we had a cold winter" argument against global warming and then calling yourself smart

[Anonymous No.10303387]

[Anonymous No.10304802]

>>10300869
>this was the coldest November on record in this area
How does someone with such a high IQ manage to say things so laughably stupid and irrelevant?

[Anonymous No.10304879]

>>10304802
He is saying that a possibly significant effect is not necessarily important.

[Anonymous No.10305410]

>>10300869
Langan speaks again on AGW.

[Anonymous No.10305484]

>>10300882
Scientific hypothesis is measured against observation, retard.

[Anonymous No.10305489]

>>10300980
>I don't have the same opinion as this man, so he is less intelligent than me even though by the commonly accepted metric, he is more intelligent than me.
gold medal gymnastics.

[Anonymous No.10305494]

>>10302831
Actual authority and knowledge is not relevant, as proven by the recent defamation of the discoverer of DNA, you epic faggot.
In modern science the most important thing is that you do not challenge the narrative.

[Anonymous No.10305829]

>>10305489
>I'll just ignore that his opinion is contradicted by decades of scientific research and that his arguments for his opinion are long debunked internet memes, and just pretend that this is a difference of opinion
Gold medal gymnastics.

[Anonymous No.10305834]

>>10305484
His observation has nothing to do with the theory, you drooling retard.

[Anonymous No.10305837]

>>10304879
Why is the coldest November on record in a certain area important?

[Anonymous No.10305849]

>>10305834
What he wrote seemed very relevant to the theory of anthropogenic climate change, he's claiming that it's a fraud and that it's funded by big energy and big finance because it's a racket to redistribute taxpayer money to themselves, which they've provably done over the last 20 years to the orders of 80 billion for just one company (General Electric) alone, and heavy profits for Exxon Mobil and others as well.
Everything Langan said here appears to match the reality of the funding behind the climate change movement as well, since my research shows that Exxon Mobil, Conoco Shell Philips, Royal Dutch Shell, Google, and General Electric were the driving financial forces behind the climate change movement of the early 2000s through present, with General Electric's Ecomagination website opening in 2005 and making 80 billion in revenue by the year 2015 (average 8 billion a year) selling their world saving green energy and energy star products.

[Anonymous No.10305852]

>>10305837
He is saying that it is not.

[Anonymous No.10305856]

>>10305852
If it's not important then how does it counter AGW?

[Anonymous No.10305864]

>>10305849
You're moving the goalposts. The observation was his observation of the weather in his area.

>he's claiming that it's a fraud
He's wrong.

>and that it's funded by big energy and big finance because it's a racket to redistribute taxpayer money to themselves
It's not.

>Everything Langan said here appears to match the reality of the funding behind the climate change movement as well, since my research shows that Exxon Mobil, Conoco Shell Philips, Royal Dutch Shell, Google, and General Electric were the driving financial forces behind the climate change movement of the early 2000s through present
They weren't.

>with General Electric's Ecomagination website opening in 2005 and making 80 billion in revenue by the year 2015 (average 8 billion a year) selling their world saving green energy and energy star products.
How does an electricity company making money off of electricity prove that AGW is a fraud?

[Anonymous No.10305870]

>>10305852
He was making a sarcastic remark because the mainstream media which is owned by five corporations always simultaneously dismisses normal temperatures all over the world, but makes a huge effort to point out every place on earth that's having an anomalous season and imply that it's because of carbon emissions.
That part didn't seem like an attempt to counter AGW, but rather the media representation of it. The rest of his post seemed to be his primary argument, with that as a joking aside.
It is very difficult to research the financial backing of anthropogenic climate change in the early 2000s, but Google hasn't ruined their engine bad enough that it's fully impossible yet. Using the specific date tool, and setting it to the later 90s and ending it at 2005 yields a great view of how there was created a narrative of fighting big oil as it simultaneously funded the anthropogenic climate change movement and got granted billions of dollars in no bid government contracts for green energy research and development and deployment. Massive numbers of "climate scientists" (literally the equivalent of insurance salesmen) work for these companies, as part of a massive conglomerate lobby effort to continue acquiring these contracts and passing laws that create barriers to entry into the energy market for the common man.
Langdan isn't wrong here but he's a faggot namefag and lower IQ than me.

[Anonymous No.10305882]

>>10305864
>moved goalposts
I just broke Langdan's paragraph down for you. He clearly did not introduce his criticism as stemming from the winter he was experiencing this year, rather, from a claim of fraud. I've posted some claims to support his narrative there, though I haven't cited them.

>it's not a racket for big oil and big energy to redistribute taxpayer money to itself
The biggest company in the world invested in it (Exxon Mobil) right before it exploded into popular culture. One of the companies investing was Google (AKA Alphabet Inc) and another owned NBC.
Christopher's criticism seems relevant and true, even if you build his sarcastic remark as a desperate strawman.

[Anonymous No.10305887]

>>10305870
>He was making a sarcastic remark
Everything he said was just as dumb, so I guess we can just assume that all of it is sarcastic.

> the mainstream media which is owned by five corporations always simultaneously dismisses normal temperatures all over the world, but makes a huge effort to point out every place on earth that's having an anomalous season and imply that it's because of carbon emissions.
If the global temperature is rapidly warming then there will be more anomalously warm temperatures than cold temperatures. Why is reporting on a trend, proven to be caused by carbon emissions, bad?

>conspiracy theory therefore I can just ignore the science
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.10305890]

>>10305882
>biggest company in the world.
Sorry, biggest *OIL company in the world. 'Only' third place for largest company in the world.

[Anonymous No.10305893]

>>10305890
Oh, well that makes it fine then.

[Anonymous No.10305894]

>>10305887
>ignore the science
It hasn't been posted.

[Anonymous No.10305901]

>>10305882
>He clearly did not introduce his criticism as stemming from the winter he was experiencing this year, rather, from a claim of fraud.
He clearly did, but whatever. Just like the Bible is only non-literal when convenient.

>>it's not a racket for big oil and big energy to redistribute taxpayer money to itself
How does a carbon tax redistribute taxpayer money to big oil?

>Not the biggest company in the world (Exxon Mobil) invested in renewable energy research as a publicity stunt after people started not liking that carbon emissions from fossil fuels are harmful to the environment.
Fixed that for you.

>Christopher's criticism seems relevant and true, even if you build his sarcastic remark as a desperate strawman.
His comment seems irrelevant and full of falsehoods, regardless of what you consider sarcastic.

[Anonymous No.10305902]

>>10305894
It's been published.

[Anonymous No.10305909]

>>10305901

Speaking of books that people use as metaphorical Bibles, have you ever read Chapter 11 of this book:

http://hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch11.html

[Anonymous No.10305911]

>>10305909
No.

[Anonymous No.10305918]

>>10305901
>He clearly did.
That whole paragraph's point is that simply measuring temperatures as they change each year is meaningless and isn't proof of anything regarding a human cause. Sorry about your reading impairment. He even capitalizes "NOT,", that it's just shit flung on the wall and sensationalized as convenient.

[Anonymous No.10305921]

>>10305901
>as a publicity stunt
That's wrong, it never ever stopped investing and is a huge green energy advocate still to this day. You're now building a conspiracy theory yourself.

[Anonymous No.10305933]

>>10305901
>how does a carbon tax redistribute taxpayer money to big oil.
First off the big oil lobbies for exemption when involving the research, development, and deployment and sales of green energy technology.
Then they don't have to pay a carbon tax, but you do. Oligopolies are famous for how they always manage to obtain more taxpayer money than they pay taxes and there will be no exception here since their think tanks write the proposals, their lobbyists lobby them, and your blind faith is reaped and sowed.
>it's only the third biggest megacorp in the world!!
An error that proves my point. Weird how you left that info out, though not surprising whereas you capitalize on a simple mistake and paint it as dishonest, while you are dishonest yourself.

[Anonymous No.10305937]

>>10305918
>That whole paragraph's point is that simply measuring temperatures as they change each year is meaningless and isn't proof of anything regarding a human cause
No it isn't. It's that global warming isn't real because he's having a cold winter. Yes, he's literally that stupid.

[Anonymous No.10305954]

>>10305921
It's a continuing publicity stunt. The amount they're spending is insignificant for them. And nothing I said is a conspiracy theory. Fix your brain.

>>10305933
>First off the big oil lobbies for exemption when involving the research, development, and deployment and sales of green energy technology.
How would a carbon tax apply to that? You're not making any sense, just desperately grasping at anything that sounds vaguely connected.

>Then they don't have to pay a carbon tax, but you do.
This is an interesting story you've made up, but what about reality? And you said that this would redistribute taxpayer money to them, not simply that they would be exempt.

>it's only the third biggest megacorp in the world!!
It's not though, and nothing proves your point because your point was wrong regardless of how big Exxon is.

Your paranoid schizophrenic posts bore me. I'm not replying to anymore until you come up with some actual substance. Enjoy ranting with no one listening.

[Anonymous No.10305973]

>>10305954
>The amount they're spending is insignificant for them.
Only because the revenue they make from it is way beyond the cost put in.
One example is Ecomagination from General Electric, which drew eighty billion dollars in revenue from the publicity stunt over 10 years.
You don't realize it, but you're agreeing with me that climate change is a fraud, a "publicity stunt," so to speak, since these megacorps backing is what brought it into popular culture at the time and has kept it there to this day.
Exxon is being sued currently for tricking investors into thinking the climate change rules they supported wouldn't be a big deal for their bottom line, when in fact they turned out to be. They shill global warming constantly.
And it's not just Exxon Mobil, it's every major oil company, it's megacorps like General Electric.
It's simple redistribution of wealth. Exxon Mobil is being massively sued for lying saying that the risks of climate change regulation are lower than they actually are.
You really aren't educated on this subject at all, you don't even know basic current events and absurdly believe that mega energy is somehow against it's own mega windfall scam.

[Anonymous No.10305976]

>>10305954
>it's not though.
It's Standard Oil with a different name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil
And yes it is.

[Anonymous No.10306149]

>>10305494
>>10300900

jesus christ this is the stupidest fucking board on this site

[Anonymous No.10306169]

>>10305973
What does it matter what these companies are doing? Of course they're going to find any way they can to make more money, no matter what the case is.
Can you post any scientific papers that suggest that the climate isn't warming and/or we're not the primary cause, where the authors don't have corporate conflicts of interest?

[Anonymous No.10306176]

>>10305909
fuck off back to >>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.10306181]

>>10306176
go back to r**dit

[Anonymous No.10306282]

>>10306149

[Anonymous No.10306518]

>we only know about climate change because of corporate ads
Now THATS the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Are you, like, 12?

[Anonymous No.10306608]

>>10306149
Really, this shithole seems to get worse every time I return.

[Anonymous No.10306663]

>>10300869
How does the smartest man in America not understand ocean currents? Adding cold water to the system from all of that melted ice can disrupt its flow majorly. This is why it’s being referred to as climate change now. It will get hotter in some places and colder in others.

[Anonymous No.10306675]

>>10305410
Does he simply deny that greenhouse gasses and their effects exist? Because humans have certainly contributed in releasing them.

[Anonymous No.10306692]

>>10300869
Who cares? Is he a climatologist? No.

[Anonymous No.10306693]

>>10300980
>anon actually thought this statement would convince someone to change his mind
maybe try reddit mate

[Anonymous No.10306698]

>>10300869
I thought Terry Tao Tao has the highest IQ in America.

[Anonymous No.10307539]

>>10306693
>retarded anon too delusional to change his mind demands that others change his mind
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.10307582]

>>10305864

Quoting the person you respond to doesn't make you smart.

These are literally the most retarded comebacks you could have possibly came up with, and you are making people who believe seriously in man-made climate change look like idiots who can't back themselves up, which is exactly what climate deniers accuse you of being a priori, so, double retard.

[Anonymous No.10307592]

>>10300869
Is there any proof this retard actually has scored >200 on an iq test? Or is it just irl e-stating?

[Anonymous No.10307762]

>>10300900
Since when has /sci/ gotten so shit? I mean over the last months more and more pol manlets infested this board with their bitter incel virgin bullshit that no one gives a shit about. Why can't you idiots just get laid ffs.

[Anonymous No.10307794]

>>10300900
>Langan says breathing in your farts makes you smarter
>"the world's smartest man said it so it must be true!"
>(insert argument here against breathing in your own farts)
>"oh, so you think you're smarter than the world's smartest man?"

appeal to authority lol

[Anonymous No.10307920]

>>10307582
>Quoting the person you respond to doesn't make you smart.
Writing irrelevant statements makes you retarded.

>you are making people who believe seriously in man-made climate change look like idiots who can't back themselves up
Stop thinking that you need to debunk every retarded claim. What can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

[None !niqjediPCA No.10308664]

>>10300869
he's a red herring.

[Anonymous No.10308980]

>>10300869
>Another episode of emmitting the equivalent of 10 supervolcanoe eruptions of CO2 every year wont have any effect on the climate

[Anonymous No.10308983]

>>10307920
Like global warming

[Anonymous No.10308988]

So now this board is apparently infested by the same brand of idiots whom flock to anyone remotely intelligent sounding that happens to validate their idiotic herd opinions. I suspect these are the same people who firmly believe in "revisionist holocaust" nonsense. >>>/pol/ is that way, imbeciles.

[Anonymous No.10309077]

>>10302972
>T. I'm from r/Atheism ask me anything .

[Anonymous No.10309153]

>It's easy to prove that cancer is on the rise ...
Hes right, especcialy on this board and in this thread in particular

[Anonymous No.10309164]

>>10300869
If this isn't decisive proof IQ doesn't measure intelligence, I don't know what is.

[Anonymous No.10309301]

There isn’t enough info on the situation to deride that he’s said anything not even remotely plausible but understandably the brick layers don’t announce the houses arrival they simply in the brick and call it home. he isn’t making it out to be an issue anyway he just wants to know that you can hear that people have voices and what’s written down isn’t always what’s being said.

[Anonymous No.10309316]

>>10300869
This is supposed to be intelligent?
He hasn't even cited any sources. potholer54 would have him for lunch.

[Anonymous No.10309326]

Armchair physicist without any formal education or knowledge in any area thinks his opinions are valid because of a high iq LOL.
lets be real he knows less physics and math than a high school student

[Anonymous No.10309332]

>>10308983
>Global warming is claimed without evidence
Why are you lying about science on the science board?

[Anonymous No.10309586]

>>10301777
wow ur so egalitarian, so wow, much progressive

[Anonymous No.10309603]

>>10306149

>>10305494 's point is that "authority and knowledge" won't help you if you say something against the narrative. Thus all reasoning on the subject should be considered on its own merits and not by authority.

You wouldn't know because you have a shit-tier verbal IQ. I suggest remedial reading classes.

[Anonymous No.10311116]

>>10300869
>appeal to authority
fuck off right wing scum.