/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15786276]

Isn't whole astronomy just a bunch of very vague assumptions and approximations made by very limited data we can gather? Pretty much just 80% of fairy tales

[Anonymous No.15786564]

>>15786276
>80%
100%
soigoys get brainwashed into believing in the garbage by their gay hollywood comic book movies.
the appeal of thinking about things outside of earth draws them in because they are total failures on earth so spending their meager brainpower on pondering imaginary things outside of earth is a distraction from their dissatisfaction with their very real lives here on earth. they never bother to ponder the fact that their own dissatisfaction stems from the fact that everyone else is also their dissatisfied with them as well because they are too low iq to have self awareness

[Anonymous No.15786676]

>>15786564
I thought thinking about exploring the great beyond is a Faustian trait? Make up your mind.

[Anonymous No.15786683]

>>15786676
>I thought thinking about exploring the great beyond is a Faustian trait?
>make up your mind
ah yes, the classic "the entire internet has the same opinion about everything, especially on some obscure german idealist philosophical issue and if i can interpret you as not following this made up consensus by me then you are hypocritical" trope

[Anonymous No.15787066]

>>15786676
>I want to explore
how come you're not willing to explore outside the goyslop box you put your television addled brain into? your entire worldview is defined by the question "is this like muh hollywood soience fiction mooooovies?"

[Anonymous No.15787538]

>>15786276
>Isn't whole astronomy just a bunch of very vague assumptions and approximations
That's a talking point flat earthers and space deniers like to use. In reality a lot of those assumptions are backed up by measurements and shit

[Anonymous No.15787553]

>>15786276
don't forget that astronomers spend the rest of their time trying to prevent human progress so they can look at the hekkin starinos

[Anonymous No.15787811]

>>15787538
I'm pretty confident in our knowledge about our solar system, but when you see shit like
>This planet gazillion light years away is actually made of glass because photons are looking sus!
and then some time after
>The glass planet gazillion light years away actually not made out of glass! why? because photons looked sus but in the other way now!
Like it's just endless guess game. Astronomers are just clowns

[Anonymous No.15787864]

>>15787811
Do you have any concrete cases?
Because there are methods to determine whether or not a planet is made out of glass.
However the problem is that (like with many discoveries) the scientific publications will say
>hey, this planet might be made out of glass, but we're really not 100% sure, we could have made an error and the measurements are a little unreliable, please someone double check this
>we double checked it, though look, it's not glass. But as mentioned previously, luckily we never 100% assumed it was
and the media will turn it into
>NEW DISCOVERY: PLANET MADE OF GLASS,THIS WILL CHANGE OUR FUTURE FOREVER!
>GLASS PLANET DISPROVEN, THE ENTIRE FIELD OF ASTROPHYSICS HAS TO BE REVISED THANKS TO THIS DISCOVERY!

[Anonymous No.15787865]

>>15786276
>>15786564
>>15787538
yes but there's still the major assumption that the earth is moving and that the sun is the centre of the so-called solar system because
muh william of ockham gives flawless inductions of reality,
even though the prior, or should i say superior geocentric models are much more elegant and beautiful mathematically (which quantum fucktards should be all over) and conceptually

[Anonymous No.15787870]

>>15787864
the earth and the planets are flying through the universe at 69,420 kilometres a second or whatever the absurd number is kek

[Anonymous No.15787874]

>>15787870
yeah, so?

[Anonymous No.15787878]

>>15787874
that's another example like the aforementioned "planet is made of glass becaause of funny looking photons"

[Anonymous No.15787886]

>Today's Moon inspires your need for companionship, feedback, or a different perspective, dear Sagittarius. Also today, Mercury heads into your solar eleventh house, where it will transit until October 22nd. During this cycle, you're in good shape for inventive new ideas, sharing ideas with others, and networking. Valuable learning experiences can result from interactions with friends, associates, or groups. It's a fine time for exploring your happiness goals and a boost to your optimism. This transit brings more attention to teams, friendships, networking, groups, community, and causes, particularly on mental levels. It's also a time of dreaming up new possibilities and possible solutions to problems.
Tell me how this isn't highly accurate, OP. I'm a Sagittarius and so far astronomy was always right about my horoscope.

[Anonymous No.15787896]

>>15787878
Look up the Gaia spacecraft, it has measured the Erath's motion relative to Sagittarius A*

[Anonymous No.15787901]

>>15787896

you're fucked in the head if you actually think everything on the earth is flying through the cosmos at 107,000 kilometres an hour, i don't give a damn what those SinoCIAop ai falsified computer generated ""experiments"" which were never done say, use your head... does that really make sense to you?

[Anonymous No.15787912]

>>15787901
>you're fucked in the head if you actually think everything on the earth is flying through the cosmos at 107,000 kilometres an hour
why?
>does that really make sense to you?
Yes, why not?
I've passed my 9th grade physics course, so I know that constant (or almost) motion is imperceptible, I know how forces interact with objects in motion and I know how orbits work so I know that the solar system has to go at a very high speed to orbit around the core of the galaxy.
All you got is "big number scary"

[Anonymous No.15787928]

>>15787912

maybe its time to try passing 10th grade too

[Anonymous No.15788404]

>>15787896
Just because the globohomo space agency says that doesn't make it true. Your belief in it without understanding the underlying technology and methods used only makes you gullible for hero worshiping the soience priest class

[Anonymous No.15788418]

>>15788404
>without understanding the underlying technology
I do though. Have a degree to back it up too.
Meanwhile the way you talk makes it sound as if you've never been in the same zip code as a university.

[Anonymous No.15788432]

>>15788418
you don't, you're just another cringe ifls pseud

[Anonymous No.15788436]

space is fake and gay, everyone knows this

[Anonymous No.15788442]

>>15788432
stay mad

[Anonymous No.15788446]

>>15788442
>stay mad

[Anonymous No.15788783]

>>15787811
pontificating theories about objects which are so inaccessible that the theory can never be disproved is a common scam in academia. archaeology, paleontology and geology all mainly rely on the same scam.
academic scientists hate the scientific method and they do everything they can to avoid heeding it

[Anonymous No.15788796]

No.

[Anonymous No.15789016]

>>15788783
100% correct but don't use the word pontificating please this is a blue board

[Anonymous No.15790051]

astrocrap is all fake af, anyone who thinks its real watch way too much soience fiction goyslop movies

[Anonymous No.15790893]

>>15786276
>very limited data we can gather?
>we
you mean the very limited data "they" can gather
unless you own a 10m class telescope yourself, you're relying on them for data.
they show us the data that supports their pet theories and they bury the data that calls their theories into question. they probably falsify data too, every other discipline does, so its safe to assume astronomers do too

[Anonymous No.15791131]

>>15787865
geocentrism and heliocentrism are the same model expressed in different coordinate systems, neither of them are the current model, which is center of mass centrism

[Anonymous No.15791142]

>>15790893
>they show us the data that supports their pet theories and they bury the data that calls their theories into question.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Telescopes automatically publish raw data on public archives. Feel free to to pursue whatever crackpot ideas you have.
http://archive.eso.org/cms.html
https://mast.stsci.edu/portal/Mashup/Clients/Mast/Portal.html
http://cas.sdss.org/dr18/
https://www2.keck.hawaii.edu/koa/public/koa.php

[Anonymous No.15791176]

>>15791131
mathematically they might be the same, but philosophically the heliocentric model considers the earth as actually flying round and round the sun and round and round the supposed milky way,
whereas the geocentric model considers the earth as perfectly stationary, not flying at all...

in one case the earth is in a state of absolute motion, in the other the earth is in a state of absolute rest...

this is why mathematics is philosophically deficient and why aristotle called it such

[Anonymous No.15792677]

>>15791176
>but philosophically the heliocentric model considers the earth as actually flying round and round the sun and round and round the supposed milky way,
no it doesn't, heliocentrism places the sun immobile at the center of the universe.

[Anonymous No.15792748]

>>15792677
well i guess originally it was that way, but pretty much all people who accept the heliocentric model also accept the milky way galaxy stuff too, and why wouldn't they if the earth is already flying round and round the sun; why wouldn't the solar system be also flying round and round something else?

[Anonymous No.15793055]

>>15792748
heliocentrism is early 1600s science, center of mass as the true center is a late 1600s idea and the existence of galaxies only became the conventional wisdom 100 years ago

[Anonymous No.15793702]

>>15786564
fpbp

[Anonymous No.15794137]

>>15791176
>but philosophically
cringe

[Anonymous No.15794157]

>>15791131
>>15791176
geocentrism is better because the epicycles produce aesthetically pleasing loops and swirls.

[Anonymous No.15794427]

>>15793055
>galaxies only became the conventional """""""""""""""""""""""""""""wisdumb"""""""""""""""""""""" 100 years ago.
Funny isn't it?
All the problematic conjectures which stuck a thorn in the side of every good theory all suddenly started appearing right around 100 years ago...
quantum
relativity
communism
electrons
atomism

why did it all start then?
is this why we had world war 1?

[Anonymous No.15794454]

>>15786276
It's called natural philosophy for a reason, you fag that doesn't understand anything beyond fairytales

[Anonymous No.15794470]

>>15787538
so i guess that just means you're less of a scientist than a flat earther

[Anonymous No.15794480]

>>15794470
I'm not even going to try and comprehend the mental gymnastics that made you come to this conclusion.

[Anonymous No.15794488]

>>15794480
>mental gymnastics
BACK TO PLEBBIT NOW SUBHUMAN FILTH
IF YOU THINK THERE WAS ANY """"LE MENTAL GYMNASTIQUE"""" INVOLVED YOU HAVE ACTUAL BRAIN DAMAGE, IT WAS A DIRECT CONCLUSION AND YOU PROBABLY THINK YOU HAVE TO DO ""LE MENTAL GYMNASTIQUE"" JUST TO FUCKING COUNT TO 10.
GO BACK NOW

[Anonymous No.15794491]

>>15794488
>BRAIN DAMAGE
hehe

[Anonymous No.15794558]

>>15786276
>whole astronomy
Why should that an exception in the Truman show you live in?

[Anonymous No.15794871]

>>15786564
ask me how I know you're a pol tourist.

[Anonymous No.15794876]

>>15787553
>human progress is when elon poos in orbit

[Anonymous No.15794880]

>>15794488
are you ok?

[Anonymous No.15795307]

>>15794488
You're fucked in the head mate but nice double dubs.

[Anonymous No.15796251]

>>15786276
its an evolving field

[Anonymous No.15796272]

>>15787538
>muh measurements an sheeiiiiiiiiiitttt
you are low iq

[Anonymous No.15796336]

>>15786564
This is what a scientist looks like

[Anonymous No.15796601]

>>15796272
says the guy who apparent doesn't even know how the scientific method works

[Anonymous No.15797161]

>>15786276
False. Astronomy was the first of the sciences to reach Positive stage. Maybe you're thinking about cosmology which is a branch of philosophy

[Anonymous No.15798216]

>>15797161
making calendars, telling time and navigating is a far cry from dark matter faggotry.
astronomy has no use in the modern world. its time to move on

[Anonymous No.15798787]

>>15798216
The low hanging fruit in astronomy has long since been picked, its pretty much a dead field of investigation these day, there is nothing more of any value to be extracted from it.

[Anonymous No.15799154]

>>15787901
velocity doesn't exert force

[Anonymous No.15800164]

>>15798787
Its only popular because the brainlets all watch way too much Hollywood soiyence fiction movies
>I fucking love soiyence!!
>Star Wars is totally real!!
>Muh alienzsss!
>Muh FTL!
>Muh laser swords!!

[Anonymous No.15800633]

>>15794427
>why did it all start then?
its all in the protocols of the elders of zion, that explains it all. before 1900 there were no jewish scientists, then suddenly the media announces that all the best scientists are jews and everything changes

[Anonymous No.15801065]

>>15794427
>why then
that's around when we got to the point of making two things:
Big enough measurements that we could see flaws in our predictions of gravity
Small enough measurements that we could see where classical mechanics start to break down

[Anonymous No.15801486]

>>15800164
Hollywood targets their movies for mass appeal, so the soience fiction movies are geared to appeal to midwits. As a result the people who devote their lives to the space crap depicted in those movies are all going to be 100iq brainlets.
thats why astronomy is such a low iq discipline

[Anonymous No.15802036]

>>15801486
the more science is promoted to the general public as something prestigious, the more midwits will be trying to participate in science as a means of cultivating their personal public image.

[Anonymous No.15802038]

>>15786276
Astronomy is the sociology of physics.
Very little sustain and most are made up fairy tales nonsenses.
Some are desperate and shameless and would rather assert that an asteroid is alien spacecraft rather than losing funding.

[Anonymous No.15802046]

there is also xenobiology.
god damn now that's a total farce that I've seen.
lmao we're gonna take spectra of some random planet 1 million light year away and this tiny piece of the spectra looks like it has piss on it, there must be life there because there's no way there can be piss without life.

[Anonymous No.15803239]

>>15802038
The people who go into that disciple paint themselves into a corner financially because their credentials aren't exploitable for private sector work. So they need to maintain their academic careers at any cost because they have no other options. As a result they are willing to tell any lie and violate any ethical constrains to keep their worthless academic careers alive

[Anonymous No.15803622]

>>15802046
>Hmmm, how can I get more funding for my career? I'll have to get a real job if I can't get muh funding
>I know, I'll make up a spectacular lie about having found space aliens

[Anonymous No.15803778]

>>15802046
actually, it's astrobiology

[Anonymous No.15804813]

>>15803239
they do that because they're too stupid to plan for the future effectively. nobody smart would ever devote themselves to majoring in astronomy

[Anonymous No.15805275]

>>15804813
Before GPS weapons manufacturers used a combination of inertial and stellar data for guidance on things like missiles and recon aircraft. That was the last practical use for astronomy, Ever since GPS astronomers have absolutely no chance whatsoever of finding private sector use for their degrees

[Anonymous No.15805278]

>>15787553
lol you think modern astronomers actually use telescopes to look at stars?

[Anonymous No.15805279]

>>15787901
yes it does make sense to us because we're not retarded like you

[Anonymous No.15806501]

>>15802046
>>15803778
Astrobiology is using astronomy to look for biosignatures, habitable planets, etc. Xenobiology would be actual biology of actual aliens.

[Anonymous No.15806505]

>>15802038
You are a fucking retard. Most astronomers thought the Oumuamua being ayylmaos was stupid. But you wouldn't know, because everything you know about science comes from IFLS.

[Anonymous No.15806506]

>>15793055
It's not conventional wisdom, and the actual difference was the realization that galaxies are not nebulae. Andromeda is bigger than the moon and visible with the naked eye in dark places, so humans have known it exists for all of history.

[Anonymous No.15806508]

>>15790051
Do you think telescopes are all connected to Jewish supercomputers that generate fake images?

[Anonymous No.15807680]

>>15806508
You have never used a telescope, you've never taken a photo via a telescope, you just look at the flash photos NASA publishes and presume that they're real because it pleases your emotional biases to do so. You got your emotional biases from watching too much soience fiction TV & movies and your inability to differentiate IRL reality from on screen fiction

[Anonymous No.15807740]

>>15807680
I have used telescopes. I have taken images with my DLSR attached to several telescopes. Please tell me how these images I took myself are fake? Funnily enough my own experiment looks a lot like those ones NASA publishes, but obviously a lot shittier and with different filters. Here you can see the pillars of creation , which are just a small part of the Eagle Nebula (M16). Not only that but these structures have been imaged by thousands of amateur astronomers. Thousands of replications.

Taken with a Canon 6D attached to C14 Schmidt Cassegrain. 33x20 second exposures at ISO 25600. Stacked with DSS, minimal adjustment of the levels.

https://www.astrobin.com/search/?q=eagle+nebula

So what experience exactly do you have with telescopes? How are you so sure it's all bullshit when you haven't even tried? You are bitching in your other thread that people can't do experiments. What experiments have you done personally to show it's all bullshit?

>It's all fake, NASA lies
Literally flattie logic here.

[Anonymous No.15808349]

>>15806505
then explain to me how you even have separate subdisciplines of astronomy that focus on making shit up about life on another planet?
of course, if you would just discard the worst of the bunch in your field, it will look pristine.
but still even without those fringe you disowned, many of modern astronomy is still about making shit up. I've seen so many shit viral simulation papers on how Neptune saved the earth or how some random fluctation of a planet orbit can crash the solar systems.
doing math then tell a story or running some simulation is cool and all but that shit is not science, it's still just making shit up.

[Anonymous No.15808359]

>>15808349
>then explain to me how you even have separate subdisciplines of astronomy that focus on making shit up about life on another planet?
There aren't. Astrobiology is the only field. Xenobiology as you suggested is fucking scifi. You're really angry about a topic you clearly you are deeply ignorant of.
>so many shit viral simulation papers on how Neptune saved the earth or how some random fluctation of a planet orbit can crash the solar systems.
>viral
Yes, so we see again that that you're getting this from pop-sci trash. All fields are misrepresented and sensationalized in the pursuit of clicks. And what's worse is you can't even distinguish resarch from fiction.

[Anonymous No.15808369]

>>15808359
note you haven't done any explaining at all, just some apologies and disowning for the trash that is happening in your field.
personally, I find that discovering some shitty ass other planets that are so plenty or exomoons is not worthwhile to spend so much time and so much money on. and even then, there's so many assumptions (yes still so fucking many), you might as well telling fairytales.
unless your field contributes to new physics, which so far modern astronomy has done almost none.

[Anonymous No.15808387]

>>15808369
>I find that discovering some shitty ass other planets that are so plenty or exomoons is not worthwhile to spend so much time and so much money on.
Oh yes, deep scientific criticism here. "I don't like it". There is nothing to defend because this is not a rational argument, it's an opinion.
>unless your field contributes to new physics
Which cosmology does. But I'm sure you don't like that either. Can't have people testing physics on large scales far beyond any earth lab.

[Anonymous No.15808434]

>>15786276
Astrophysics and Astronomy are cake, when the math doesn't work you can just add "dark" as a prefix and publish.

[Anonymous No.15809726]

>>15808434
yeah, its all so fake and gay that its hard to tell if they're serious or if they're satirizing science intentionally

[Anonymous No.15810229]

>>15787066
ouch

[Anonymous No.15810256]

>>15805279
if youre not retarded then why are you allowing such cognitive dissonance in your randomly generated neurobiology?

[Anonymous No.15811562]

>>15808387
>cosmology contributes to physics
what contribution? fake dark matter?

[Anonymous No.15811809]

>>15811562
dark matter can't be fake, its in all modern science cosmology theories

[Anonymous No.15812964]

>>15811809
cosmology isn't science

[Anonymous No.15813425]

>>15812964
>huhuh, I'm literally gonna take images of the sky and start to make shit up about other planets, stars and cosmological objects. I'm gonna make it as outrageous as possible to gather attention while also keep it somewhat plausible according to current theories.
>doesn't matter cause no one can go there and check my shit anyway
>now that's science. I'm a great scientist now. take that, chud.

[Anonymous No.15813438]

>>15811562
Cosmologists predicted a fine structure state in carbon nuclei, just based on the existence of carbon in our in universe which is produced by stellar fusion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon-12

Neutrino oscillations were discovered from comparisons to the solar standard model. Cosmology is now constraining the neutrino mass, and may be the first method to measure the sun of masses.

And then there are contributions to quantum gravity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdS/CFT_correspondence

[Anonymous No.15813441]

>>15813425
>I'm gonna make it as outrageous as possible
So you believe your feelings about how things should be should trump the scientific process?

[Anonymous No.15813449]

>>15813441
no. it's the current absolute state of cosmology. making outrageous shit up to get more funding. the discipline is now full of charlatan and narcissists and no one should take cosmology seriously until it fixes itself.

[Anonymous No.15813452]

>>15813449
>outrageous shit
And what objective process did you use to define what is "outrageous"?

[Anonymous No.15813492]

>>15786276
What 20% is true and where do I learn it? I want to learn astronomy but I want to learn the real stuff

[Anonymous No.15813537]

>>15787901
i have a developed frontal lobe so yeah, it does makes sense to me my missing link friend

[Anonymous No.15813751]

>>15813492
The astronomy within the scope of our current technological progress, which is our solar system and things that can be predicted by math and physics like black holes and shit

[Anonymous No.15813832]

genuinely one of the most retarded threads on this board, but it's nothing new to realize 90% of posters here are just above average intelligence subhumans who don't know anything about science. because, knowing about science is way more than knowing some niche technical terms from your major, to truly understand it one must read the history and philosophy of science, subjects this board never discusses for a reason. /sci/ subhumans only think about "what should i major in?" and "how much is the salary", and thinking they're genuises who've already made it for having a stem related degree, will talk arrogantly on what's and what's not scientific, dismissing philsophy, and because of the deep specialization seen today where it's hard to have even basic understanding of the other sciences, dismissing fields of natural science as "pseudo science" like op does here, failing to understand, failing to study it. basically a worthless subhuman.
tldr kys

[Anonymous No.15813901]

>>15813832
5 lines of reddit style mental breakdown and 0 actual arguments why the thread is retarded, platinum post

[Anonymous No.15814050]

>>15813901
read my post again, subhuman waste of oxygen
you're also giving no arguments in response to mine but you're so overbearingly stupid you can't realize that, peak duning-kruger subhuman style

[Anonymous No.15814060]

>>15814050
>subhuman waste of oxygen
waba laba dub dub
your post has no arguments, it's just an article with the set of all reddit midwit r/atheism insults they came up with over the years, in the middle of it you start ranting about people on /sci/ caring about careers and salaries in science field. there are literally 0 arguments against anything that was said in the thread so far, for or against the claim in the OP post. you just watched big bang theory once and decided to base your personality on sheldon. it's cringe, just stop

[Anonymous No.15814065]

>>15814050
>>15813832
>mom wey down't wespect my swience, I'm angwy >:(

[Anonymous No.15814068]

>>15814060
there's nothing inherently embarassing about what i typed other than your brain being so full of consoomer faggy media like big bang theory (never watched it) and internet tropes about atheists and science that you can't adress my argument, got it.
>here are literally 0 arguments against anything that was said in the thread
i'm sure this thread full of aspie retards wholly debunked the pseudo soience of astronomy, but i haven't read it yet. care to type those arguments for me?

[Anonymous No.15814069]

>>15813832
Sadly he makes these shitty theads regularly, there's no logic to it other than his autistic rage at astronomers over the starlink stuff.

[Anonymous No.15814074]

>>15814068
>um.. uhh.. big bang.. what? n-never heard of it..
>can't adress my argument,
I said 2 times there's no argument because there's no argument. you can pretend like there is a 100 more replies it won't change reality, fucking clown
>but i haven't read it yet
lol even lmao
>>15814069
also stop talking to yourself retard

[Anonymous No.15814076]

>>15814074
i won't read this whole thread because there's nothing of value here. i'm not keen on studying through 4chan such as yourself, subhuman faggot. go watch big bang theory and take it up your ass

[Anonymous No.15814083]

>>15814076
>DIDN"T READ LMAO I WON I WON
faggot is official broken. btfo

[Anonymous No.15814089]

>>15814083
>lol you clown!!
>literally like literally no argument
>gay netflix series reference
>claims to epic own lolol
gay zoomer, get the fuck out of this site and kys

[Anonymous No.15814105]

>>15814089
>gay netflix series reference
I see it really struck a nerve

[Anonymous No.15814552]

>>15814076
you will never be a scientist
you will never even be a mathematician

[Anonymous No.15814870]

>having satellite internet that's not dogshit anymore in not progress

[Anonymous No.15814872]

>>15814870
>>15794876

[Anonymous No.15815416]

>>15813832

[Anonymous No.15816028]

>>15812964
>sample size = 1
cosmology will never be a real science

[Anonymous No.15817041]

>>15786276
>Isn't whole astronomy just a bunch of very vague assumptions and approximations made by very limited data we can gather? Pretty much just 80% of fairy tales
>99.999%

[Anonymous No.15817066]

>>15815416

[Anonymous No.15817613]

>>15786276
>very vague
thats an understatement, they're usually satisfied to get to with +/- several orders of magnitude in their estimates

[Anonymous No.15818649]

>>15817066
>emotionally triggered by your own low iq
how dumb do you have to be to let that happen to you?

[Anonymous No.15819243]

>>15813832
>genuinely one of the most retarded threads on this board
it was a high iq thread until you came along to destroy the average with your 88 iq wall of text

[Anonymous No.15820020]

>>15807740
>the pillars of creation
tell me that soiyence is a religion without explicitly stating that soiyence is a religion

[Anonymous No.15820046]

>>15786276
No, it's objective observations mostly. The rest is presictions based on established science.

[Anonymous No.15820486]

>>15787553
Ohh boy government backed and funded war satelites that are going to explode in 10 fucking years, so fucking based and le redpilled. Go back to shitting up your room Jr.

[Anonymous No.15820499]

>>15788783
Do you have a single fact to back that up?

[Anonymous No.15820514]

>>15820499
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man
The whole human race origin, out of africa clown theory, all that fairytales bullshit about how dinosaurs looked like, what they ate, how they mated hundred of millions years ago.

Many such disciplines are like that where they just make shit up without evidences but no one bother to expose them because it get the funding and good TV exposure. After all if there is no man in the sky left to believe we need to invent new entertainment.

[Anonymous No.15820521]

>>15820514
That is technically a single fact to back that up. But its another entirely to extrapolate from this that everyone is lying.

[Anonymous No.15820528]

>>15820521
They're not even lying.
They are literally making shit up without any way to test or really falsify what they say. They're not lying. How can you say that they are lying when they are just writing fairytales and proud of doing so. Everything they say are "theories" that can never be checked.
Like what some physicist say about string theory: not even wrong. Those disciplines are not even lying.

[Anonymous No.15820531]

>>15820528
A person LIED about the validity of the species he found. They LIED about what they found, and used that to justify working backwards to support a model. Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that every field you mentioned is doing this?

[Anonymous No.15821038]

>>15820531
>Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that every field you mentioned is doing this?
Can you prove that they aren't? Theres already a fantastic amount of evidence that they are doing it, its already been posted in this thread.
The ball is in your court

[Anonymous No.15822425]

>>15820528
>They are literally making shit up without any way to test or really falsify what they say. They're not lying.
They're lying by calling themselves scientists if they're presenting unfalsifiable conjectures as science because the scientific method turns on the possibility of falsification

[Anonymous No.15823720]

>>15822425
Liars can never call themselves liars because then they wouldn't be lying. So they call themselves scientists instead

[Anonymous No.15823873]

>>15807740
>I don't know what that "scientific method" thing is, but I'm sure it involved taking photographs.

[Anonymous No.15823876]

>>15813832
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
Go dilate.

[Anonymous No.15824496]

>>15823873
is coffee good for you?

[Anonymous No.15824502]

>>15823873
>Space is fake, you've never observed it yourself. NASA lies.
>Actually I have.
>Silence
It's called indepdently confirming that things look like. That's perfectly scientific. It destroyed your flattie argument so hard you deleted your post.

[Anonymous No.15824636]

>>15786276
Anon, what do you think science is if not attempting to derive what little you can from the data you're able to gather, and then trying to test what you've figured out to see if you're right?

[Anonymous No.15825898]

>>15824636
You don't know that from experience, your knowledge of the topic is what you've cobbled together from watching Star Trek and Bill Nye shows.

[Anonymous No.15826497]

>>15786276
>Pretty much just 80% of fairy tales
thats generous, they weren't even able to predict Jupiter had a ring system until it was photographed up close by voyager, regardless having the data on Saturn's ring system available

[Anonymous No.15826625]

>>15807740
Space is real, but what THEY don't want you to know is that we as humans are trapped. We can go to low orbit but there is a forcefield that kills any organic lifeforms trying to go through it. We can only send drones and machines to go and explore the outer space. We are trapped here due to an ancient race of interstellar ant people who built the force field keeping us enclosed to planet earth
>Voyager: real
>moon landings: fake

[Anonymous No.15826627]

>>15807740
Its a glass dome with a bunch of glitter on it. This is what [[(they]]) want to hide from us. Your picture is real, but actually its just glitter, so deceptive, so tantalisingly close. We have been played for damned fools...

[Anonymous No.15826633]

>>15808369
>I find that discovering some shitty ass other planets that are so plenty or exomoons is not worthwhile to spend so much time and so much money on
That's neat. Thats also your opinion.

[Anonymous No.15827352]

>>15820528
>Everything they say are "theories" that can never be checked.
They aren't scientific theories, scientific theories need to include the aspect of disprovability or they aren't scientific theories. Without disprovability its just an unscientific conjecture.

[Anonymous No.15828806]

>>15824636
useless poorly drawn conjectures are not science

[Anonymous No.15828829]

>>15786276
Star trek is the gayest platform for any franchise, it was written by color revolutionary jews, and all their outfits subliminally tie into how much of a tool they are.
They were nothing but federation assholes going around space starting shit with weird foreign life forms, and then always getting kicked out of every host star system.

[Anonymous No.15829685]

>>15828829
have you seen the research that correlates watching star trek with pedophilia?

[Anonymous No.15831040]

>>15820020
it used to be just called "the eagle nebula" or M16 before the atheists insisted on pompously attaching their cringey propaganda to it

[Anonymous No.15831960]

>>15786564
fpbp

[Anonymous No.15832857]

>>15786564
the sad part about that is if the sois would just do a little bit of exercise and stop being so lazy then everything about themselves that drives them to seek escapism would evaporate quickly.

[Anonymous No.15834054]

>>15829685
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/pedophilia-and-star-trek_b_5857

[Anonymous No.15834852]

>>15820514
>out of africa clown theory
has been completely debunked

[Anonymous No.15835858]

>>15829685
The original article about that was in https://macleans.ca/ but its so old that you now need to look it up on archive.org. Its a well researched piece of writing, full of police statistics which show the extremely strong connection between a sci-fi nerd and being a pedo

[Anonymous No.15836857]

>>15835858
https://web.archive.org/web/20060710015655/http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/justice/article.jsp?content=20050530_106573_106573

[Anonymous No.15836863]

>>15786276
Yes. It's basically just astrology for midwits.

[Anonymous No.15836999]

Does the observable universe have non-zero angular momentum?

[Anonymous No.15838091]

>>15836999
clearly it does not

[Anonymous No.15838678]

>>15838091
How do you know?

[Anonymous No.15839540]

>>15838678
I know everything about the entire universe

[Anonymous No.15840433]

>>15839540
typical level of intellectual modesty and humility amongst scientists

[Anonymous No.15841714]

>>15839540
what color underwear am i wearing?

[Anonymous No.15842402]

>>15841714
You aren't wearing underwear

[Anonymous No.15843490]

>>15786276
>Pretty much just 80% of fairy tales
probably more than 80%

[Anonymous No.15844152]

>>15836857
>The first thing detectives from the Toronto police sex crimes unit saw when they entered Roderick Cowan's apartment was an autographed picture of William Shatner. Along with the photos on the computer of Scott Faichnie, also busted for possessing child porn, they found a snapshot of the pediatric nurse and Boy Scout leader wearing a dress "Federation" uniform. Another suspect had a TV remote control shaped like a phaser. Yet another had a Star Trek credit card in his wallet. One was using "Picard" as his screen name. In the 3 1/2 years since police in Canada's biggest city established a special unit to tackle child pornography, investigators have been through so many dwellings packed with sci-fi books, DVDs, toys and collectibles like Klingon swords and sashes that it's become a dark squadroom joke. "We always say there are two types of pedophiles: Star Trek and Star Wars," says Det. Ian Lamond, the unit's second-in-command. "But it's mostly Star Trek."

soiyence fiction is faggots 100% confirmed

[Anonymous No.15845285]

>>15791131
geocentrism is better, because thats where we live. heliocentric coordinate systems all need to eventually be translated to geocentric if they're ever going to be put to any practical use.

[Anonymous No.15845894]

>>15786276
astronomy: 95% of the universe is made of stuff we can't observe or understand

also astronomy: I understand how everything in the universe works

[Anonymous No.15846952]

>>15845894
Yes, dark matter creates that paradox where any explanation for anything turns on ignorance of the true nature of unobservable matter

[Barkun No.15846955]

>>15846952

[Anonymous No.15847747]

>>15846952
>dark matter creates that paradox where any explanation for anything turns on ignorance of the true nature of unobservable matter
This, without knowing the nature of dark matter, which is the overwhelming majority of matter and most significant class of matter in the universe, making guesses about how things in the universe works is a ridiculous stab in the dark. Its like betting on a football game without even knowing what teams are playing

[Anonymous No.15848960]

>>15847747
its worse than that, because one thing we do know about dark matter is that the milky way's dark matter halo necessarily distorts our view of everything outside the milky way to the point that observations of anything extragalactic are little more than a mirage.

[Anonymous No.15848967]

>>15848960
>the milky way's dark matter halo necessarily distorts our view
How?

[Anonymous No.15849645]

>>15838091
nobody knows, 95% of the universe is unobservable

[Anonymous No.15849656]

>>15836863
Worse.
Astrology at least make falsifiable claims.
Cosmology on the other hand..

[Anonymous No.15849660]

Answer: no
but it depends what exactly you mean by astronomy. what is being assumed do you think? telescopes like making observations of outer planets, stars, galaxies and measuring their chemical and physical properties from the light. where is their vagueness?

[Anonymous No.15850833]

>>15848967
gravitational lensing.

[Anonymous No.15851485]

>>15850833
The fact that no astronomers seem to care about the glaringly obvious fact that the milky way's dark matter halo necessarily distorts our view of the universe via gravitational lensing strongly suggests that astronomers don't genuinely think dark matter is real

[Anonymous No.15852673]

>>15849656
Is a claim falsifiable if you delete the claim after its been falsified?

[Anonymous No.15853156]

>>15786276
science is all fake, only meant for entertainment purposes, don't take it too seriously

[Anonymous No.15853164]

>>15850833
And how much deflection is their by your calculations?

>>15851485
Or it it's entirely negligible. Waiting for your evidence showing otherwise.

[Anonymous No.15853172]

>>15853156
>(some) science is all fake, only meant for entertainment purposes, don't take it too seriously
Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Your computer and internet isn't fake.

[Anonymous No.15854518]

>>15853172
Computers and the internet aren't science. computers were an invention of the Lyonnaise textile industry, telegraphy was invented by an artist, packet switched networks were invented by housewives in India.
Scientists are losers who publish toxic falsehoods in replication crisis journals, they don't invent useful things.

[Anonymous No.15855358]

>>15854518
Science fags are constantly trying to reward themselves credit for things they had no part in creating because they have nothing of their own creation that worth bragging about.

[Anonymous No.15855396]

>>15788436
I don't know this because it's not true

[Anonymous No.15855403]

all knowledge is conjectural, read Popper

[Anonymous No.15856772]

>>15855403
No, Popper is conjectural

[Anonymous No.15858226]

>>15855358
soiyence claims that it invented everything when in reality it only invents politically motivated lies that get published in replication crisis journals

[Anonymous No.15858886]

>>15858226
>soiyence claims that it invented everything when in reality it only invents politically motivated lies that get published in replication crisis journals

[Anonymous No.15860018]

>>15855403
Popper is conjectural as well as fake and gay

[Anonymous No.15860023]

>>15786276
no. you fucking moron.