lol science

File: 62 KB, 455x479, okk.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

lol science Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:01:44 2010 No.1808983 [Reply] [Original]

I realized no science theory will ever be true or describe objective reality.

Time to study philosophy and get some real knowledge.

Cya suckers, enjoy living in the matrix and figuring out nothing, I gotta go transcend this shit.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:02:44 2010 No.1808986 >>1808983 time to do some drugz bro!!! fuck text books

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:03:44 2010 No.1808990 >implying there's anything to transcend The only useful knowledge we can gain is the knowledge of our surroundings. Your hypothetical knowledge cannot serve in any mean but to entertain.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:03:44 2010 No.1808991 >>1808983 science is just full of research programs and language games that change over time BUT IT IS STILL USEFUL useful like how we need plumbing and other trades

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:04:44 2010 No.1808996 No you double nigger I'M the warden! You can't be the warden because he's me, and I'm the warden.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:05:44 2010 No.1808998 >>1808983 Phd in science. Ph stands for philosophy. OP doesn't know what philosophy or science is.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:05:44 2010 No.1808999 do evolutionary biology

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:05:44 2010 No.1809000 >>1808990 it serves the most important function: how to live life enjoy being a capitalist drone working under the illusion of objectivity

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:06:44 2010 No.1809003 Fellas, fellas, fellas. Surely we can agree on one thing. At least we're not fine art majors.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:06:44 2010 No.1809007

>>1808999

ya do biology, psych and cognitive psych

as far as im concerned the only interesting fields in science are the ones that deal with Humans and consciousness...the rest are dry and intellectually handicapped...

no one cares about minerals and particles, the fuck are they good for? nothing.

first we gotta figure out consciousness

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:06:44 2010 No.1809008 >implying philosophy can't be a hobby

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:08:44 2010 No.1809012

Kind of agree with OP.

BUT academic philosophy is just as retarded as academic science. Don't study either academically, universities are shit in terms of personal enlightenment or figuring out the world

self-study is the way to go

go to University in order to get a career

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:09:44 2010 No.1809018 >>1809012 Study everything, it's all good Do work you enjoy, fuck money and prestige Enjoy life, it's pretty short, you're almost dead lol

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:11:44 2010 No.1809029

>>1809000
>Implying I'm not a hippy, left wing, pot smoking physicist.

You don't have to spend 10 hours a week in a classroom to question society and values. Philosophy is intuitive to any intelligent person. The techniques in problem solving and analysis learned in physics can easily be applied to other subjects, even different value spheres. So why devote myself to understanding in one dimension when I can learn literally multidimensional analysis on a quantitative level, and apply to everything (with necessary abstractions)?

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:17:44 2010 No.1809054

>>1809029

because it isn't abstract enough, it doesn't question its own premises.

in order to test theories you have to accept a gigantic framework which isn't even true, and will never be true..

plus what you are researching is trivial, unless you are just in it for the money--then it has a use. science is just another trade skill.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:18:44 2010 No.1809056 until we can genetically engineer super beings and exterminate the human race science is fucking USELESS

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:19:44 2010 No.1809060 >>1809029 What college you go to? I'm a junior hippy pot smoking physicist at the University of Illinois UC.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:20:44 2010 No.1809064

>>1809054

Ya, well some people are smart and just want a good intellectual way to make money, instead of doing heavy lifting.

No one said science will discover any truths or accurate view of reality. Science will never say what is the good life and what is worth doing, and how to use what it discovers. It is a very sterile discipline, but still useful...like any trade

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:21:44 2010 No.1809073 >mathematician >things are actually true >look for proof, not for evidence >almost everything i work with is too abstract to have any applications >alpha as fuck

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:21:44 2010 No.1809074 >>1808983 >gravity >laws of motion >OP is fag

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:21:44 2010 No.1809076

>>1809054

>Doesn't question it's own premises

You have no idea about the history of physics, or the purpose of experimentation. Philosophy proves nothing, and is just intellectual masturbation that never results in anything provable or testable, nor does it ever aim to make itself empirical. It's basically just a broader form of theology.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:23:44 2010 No.1809083 File: 360 KB, 645x4889, shitpissvomit.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] <--- OP

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:24:44 2010 No.1809086

science
>easy way to make money without doing physical labor

>make up models to explain some observations

>never figure out anything fundamental or deep about reality

>tentative, transient models subject to change over time

>models subject to different interpretations, lol

>reductionist fallacies everywhere

>circular reasoning everywhere, defining things into existence lol

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:24:44 2010 No.1809091
File: 32 KB, 200x300, philoponus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>1808998
This.

Bitches don't know science is an applied branch of philosophy.

Philosophy is the study off any problem of any type, not just the Herpa-Derp "Is this real life?" bullshit pseudo-intellectuals puke out. This is why science professors are called PHDs (Philosophy doctorates).

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:27:44 2010 No.1809106

>>1809076

I know about the history. It is the result of philosophers arguing about important things and how to acquire "practical knowledge"

Physics is one of the many gems that Philosophy continues to shit out.

Philosophy shat out Law, Ethics, Anthropology, Physics, Psychology, etc...now it is in the process of shitting out Cognitive Science and putting together a framework for Neuro-scientists to study consciousness with...

Philosophy is simply the God of every intellectual pursuit. Nothing compares to it, nothing is greater than it, everything owes its existence to it.

Deal with it nerd.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:29:44 2010 No.1809120 >>1809073 >implying mathematic axioms are universal undeniable laws

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:29:44 2010 No.1809121 Engineering is to Science as Science is to Philosophy. Deal with it nerds.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:30:44 2010 No.1809127 >>1809121 >Engineering is to Science as Science is to Philosophy. AWWWW SSHITTTTTTT SON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:31:44 2010 No.1809132 File: 37 KB, 278x389, snob.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] scientist are just Philosophical engineers? OMFG LOLd

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:32:44 2010 No.1809138 >>1809132 But how does one philosophy of homosex?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:33:44 2010 No.1809154 ITT: butthurt sciencefags getting out witted by philosophyfags Too bad neither of you will enjoy the aesthetic bliss of the fine arts

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:34:44 2010 No.1809158

>>1809106

Assuming you're the person I replied to you made the claim that physics doesn't question it's own premises, the abandonment of a 300 year old framework (Newtonian Mechanics) shows that you're talking out of your ass.

While philosophy may have been the start to the sciences, it's more philosophical thinking then the actual study of philosophy itself that resulted in their creation. Modern day philosophy is shit compared to what it spawned.

If you need to be taught how to think philosophically you're already behind anyone taking a science major, they have that ability already and are applying it.

What you end up with at the end is that you're able to think just as abstractly as somebody with a science degree, except you know nothing of the physical reality that is.

Also, if you don't think quantum mechanics has a profound influence on the deepest of philosophical questions, such as what existence itself is, then you're a deluded fool with too much self-importance.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:35:44 2010 No.1809165 File: 62 KB, 308x290, atheist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] so...much...trolling

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:36:44 2010 No.1809169 >>1809106 Some branches of philosophy are shittier than others, and the ones related to science (empiricism, naturalism) are god tier compared to aesthetics, morality, and the rest.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:36:44 2010 No.1809171 >>1809154 seconded^ I simply do what I enjoy without being pretentious or elitist about it. Even though the philosophyfags argue better they are still just as insecure as the science fanboys....

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:38:44 2010 No.1809179

>>1809158

quantum mechanics is irrelevant

what matters now is philosophy of math and logic

and philosophy of mind, consciousness particularly

These are the only relevant purely intellectual pursuits

in terms of practicality moral and legal philosophy still trump anything physics is dealing with right now (just in terms of being useful to man, not money making)

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:41:44 2010 No.1809186 >>1809179 I wish I could revoke your right to use anything with a transistor in it.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:42:44 2010 No.1809192

--how consciousness works and what it is---
that is the question science and philosophy need to answer.
But first we need philosophers to figure out a coherent language for this field, define the meanings, do the thought experiments, figure out the variables before the engineers and scientists do the tedious grunt work!!

if you don't know how the mind works you can't really explain most observations accurately...you are missing 90% of the picture lol....at best you make some pragmatic predictions...but without any deep understanding about the structure itself

thats why physics is so trivial at this juncture...other than being a lucrative trade for nerds.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:44:44 2010 No.1809200

>>1809186

hey plumbing is super useful, but trivial and irrelevant

we use it all the time, but it lacks any interesting philosophical ramifications

quantum mechanics is just as irrelevant as plumbing..no one cares about it, it says nothing interesting about our world

it is another silly reductionist model that will be replaced by another silly reductionist model...etc
boring

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:45:44 2010 No.1809203 >>1809083 Infinite energy!

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:45:44 2010 No.1809205 >>1809192 >thats why physics is so trivial at this juncture...other than being a lucrative trade for nerds. i feel the same way, that's why im going into neuro-science and evolutionary biology physics is way too dry, and philosophically mute

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:45:44 2010 No.1809206 >>1809192 nevertheless I think neurology will reach there first and the philosofags will start butthurting to the results bringing fourth non-sensical arguments to disprove them [spoiler] no one will give a fuck though [:spoler]

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:46:44 2010 No.1809210

>>1809205

physics can shed some light on neuroscience, don't rule it out so quickly

plus we need physicists and engineers and tradesmen to make tools for intellectuals to use when they figure out important things about reality

we need grunt workers...thats what scientists are for

philosophers do the thinking, scientists are the engineers

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:47:44 2010 No.1809212

>>1809192

/yawn sounds like the same thing philosophers have been talking about for millenia, I'll consider your field important when you actually produce something other then subjective ramblings.

I mean, remember that all of our logic and reasoning is shaped and influenced by the consciousness that you want to explain, so it all becomes circular in the end. Quantum physics has shown that the universe doesn't have to follow what we consider logical.

Anyways, while you struggle to be relevant I'm just going to

Enjoy using a computer provided to me by physics

Enjoy abundant food provided to me by agricultural science

Enjoy the health provided to me by medical science.

and go to bed.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:48:44 2010 No.1809216 >>1809206 doesn't understand how neuroscience works these days lol

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:48:44 2010 No.1809219

>>1809205

>i feel the same way, that's why im going into neuro-science and evolutionary biology

did you know that even if you split a lobster's brain into half it still feels pain when boiled? that's because its central nervous system is organized in two parallel series of ganglia

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:48:44 2010 No.1809221 >>1809060 I went there. What dorm are you staying at? I stayed at Allen Hall and one of the Gabes Places (which suck btw).

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:50:44 2010 No.1809229

>Quantum physics has shown that the universe doesn't have to follow what we consider logical.

quantum is one level of reduction, its properties don't apply to anything else but itself

for example, atoms are colorless, cats are made of atoms, thus cats are colorless

take an intro to philosophy class, maybe you'll learn how to not commit basic fallacies

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:52:44 2010 No.1809242 >>1809229 >atoms are colorless take an intro to quantum physics class, maybe you'll learn how to not commit basic fallacies

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:52:44 2010 No.1809243

>>1809212

I also enjoy trivial things that give me pleasure

like toilets and computers and I appreciate tradesmen like plumbers and chemists. Thanks!

But for intellectual pursuits I prefer the deepest and richest fields, the most cutting edge.

Philosophy and neuroscience

law and ethics

things that matter and shape our lives

physics just wastes its time on shitty reductionist theories in order to explain other levels of its theories

no one cares how you justify your theories and how far you split your imaginary atoms....they are practically irrelevant and intellectually inert

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:53:44 2010 No.1809247

>>1809229

>for example, atoms are colorless, cats are made of atoms, thus cats are colorless

Atoms emit photons which we perceive as color, cats are made atoms, emit light that we perceive as color.

Learn some basic physics and have an understanding of the universe before you even claim to show flaws in physical theories, you sound exactly like a creationist right now, creating strawmen left and right.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:53:44 2010 No.1809249 >>1809242 I guess the point flew over your head not surprising.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:55:44 2010 No.1809256 >>1809247 Atoms have no bones. Cats are completely made of atoms. Cats have no bones. I simplified it so even a physicsfag could understand.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:55:44 2010 No.1809260 File: 46 KB, 600x400, FG04_003_PCT.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1809229 atoms are colorless. GirlsLaughing.jpg

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:56:44 2010 No.1809266 >>1809256 They wont get it, logic is not their strong point. They simply know how to apply formulas mechanically. They think quantum mechanics is "true" and applies to higher levels of reduction lol physicsfags actually believe this

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:58:44 2010 No.1809274

>>1809243

Meh, go ahead and get a philosophy major, you've proven yourself to be too dumb to ever have any weight. I mean just look at your argument

>things that matter and shape our lives
>posting on computer

how has physics not shaped your life you dullard?

The very fact that you're doing what you're doing, studying what you're studying, or even alive has been shaped by scientific progress far more then Descartes uttering, "Cognito ergo sum".

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:59:44 2010 No.1809281 >>1809256 >atoms have no bones >bones are made up entirely of atoms >Richard Dunn needs your spare bones >don't send in squirrel bones

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 02:59:44 2010 No.1809284 >>1809260 >Mercury's ionized radiation = rainbow I always thought that "Mercury" sounds like a drag-queen's pseudonym.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:02:44 2010 No.1809293

>>1809260

Actually atoms only have color under certain situations.
If the electrons give out exactly the same light as they absorb, the atom will be "colorless"

The light an atom reflects and the color it produces is not the same color an actual cat will reflect. Color depends on many variables, including physiology and psychology, even linguistics.

Physic fanboys aren't used to such broad ideas though with subtle angles, that is why they lash out ignorantly against the other poster.

So the syllogism is quite relevant

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:02:44 2010 No.1809297

>>1809266

Oh I get it, I also see the major flaw in reasoning. Apparently there's a reason you need 3 years to understand how to not make basic fallacies in argumentation.

>Atoms have no bones
>Bones are made of atoms
>Cats are made of atoms
>Cats can have bones

I mean, you're intentionally making gaping flaws and leaps in logic, there's no wonder that you truly believe that just sitting in a room and thinking, without ever going that step further to see if what you think is consistent with reality, will ever affect the world.

The basic computer science courses I take expect a better ability to logic and reason then this shit you're presenting as "logic".

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:04:44 2010 No.1809302

>>1809256
What are you trying to prove by spewing out logical fallacies and asserting scientists make them? Watch me do it too:

A philosophy book is made entirely of paper and ink. Paper and ink aren't knowledge; therefore philosophy books contain no knowledge.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:04:44 2010 No.1809305

>>1809293

Ya, thnx. The point is you can't simply transpose properties from one level of reduction onto another just because something is made out of something else.

Thats why properties of atoms and quantum phenomena don't transfer 1:1 to higher levels of reduction.

Water is wet, but individual atoms are not.
YOu can't go UP or DOWN, usually...maybe in some cases you can by coincidence

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:05:44 2010 No.1809312

>>1809302

The point was some faggot said quantum phenomena and sub atomic properties apply to the real world, like 1 to 1.

like if something teleports on a quantum level it can teleport in real life

or stupid quantum properties have philosophical ramifications

they dont. you can't go from lower levels to higher levels 1:1

stfu and read the thread before you talk to your superior

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:08:44 2010 No.1809325

>>1809297

the logical flaw applies to the poster who said quantum physics has interesting philosophical ramifications for the macroworld we live in

it doesn't for the same reason as the Atom-Cat example.

atoms have their properties
cats are made of atoms

it doesn't mean a cat has the same properties or lack of properties

simple idea, simple argument

i win automatically

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:08:44 2010 No.1809326 >>1809221 I stayed at PAR then ISR, now at an apartment that's far as fuck from loomis.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:09:44 2010 No.1809332 >>1809256 >Atoms have no cats >Bones are completely made of atoms >Bones have no cats makes perfect sense

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:09:44 2010 No.1809334

quantum theory is just a guess lol

it's gonna be thrown out the window in 20 years along with particle theory

it'll be replaced by strings and shit who the fuck knows

every model is just an attempt, none are true or accurate, we only do science because it works, not because we understand reality with it

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:09:44 2010 No.1809335 ITT: people who don't have an understanding of both philosophy and science

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:09:44 2010 No.1809337 >every model is just an attempt, none are true or accurate, we only do science because it works, not because we understand reality with it /thread

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:11:44 2010 No.1809346 >>1809325 Ho and what about special relativity that show that the past, the present and the future can exist at the same time?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:13:44 2010 No.1809358 >>1809346 >implying scientists have a coherent theory of Time lol so sad, go read some philosophy of time faggot

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:14:44 2010 No.1809364

>>1809325

Hmm, interesting, where did I ever claim they transfer 1:1? I said that it proved that reality didn't need to be consistent with our logic, not that it automatically applied across all boundaries. Get reading comprehension and don't instantly assume something is what you want it to be, oh wait, you're basically theologians so that's your job.

Now I will come closer to saying the above however. Quantum mechanics is completely consistent regardless of the scale at which you apply it, it's self-limiting in that the larger the system you're absorbing, the theory itself shows that the effects become harder to detect. It's really not bounded by any scale, if you properly apply it, it correctly tells you the properties at that size. Now of course this means that you don't see any of the strangeness that happens at our scale, they are automatically reduced until they reach what we observe.

Obviously anytime someone uses reductionist methods they have to be careful when considering things outside of that method, but physicists are good at doing this, apparently philosophers are not. You can't consider the properties of a single atom and then assume its the property of a collection of atoms, you have to consider how each atom interferes with its fellows, when you do that, the picture becomes exactly what we observe at any level.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:14:44 2010 No.1809365

>>1809305
Except "Wet" (liquidity) is a property of the freedom the atoms have to move.

I'm not sure why philosophyfags are raging that "Scientists think quantum events apply to large scale". It right in the fucking name QUANTUM, latin for very small. When you've got a whole bunch of atoms all the random quantum behaviour averages out to the point of being almost irrelevant. Its the same reason psychology (individual human behaviour) is not the same thing as sociology (group human behaviour).

There are places where you're dealing with very small numbers of particles; like the transistors in your computer, so quit being a prick.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:16:44 2010 No.1809378 >>1809364 absorbing=observing, I'm tired.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:18:44 2010 No.1809386 >>1809358 > Implying that because you think it's true it's true. Go read a book about special relativity and how it affects philosophy

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:20:28 2010 No.1809395 [DELETED]

>>1809334

>Evolutionary theory is just a guess lol

it's gonna be thrown out the window in 20 years along with the big bang theory

>it'll be replaced by creationism and shit who the fuck knows

>every model is just an attempt, none are true or accurate, we only do science because it disproves god, not because we understand reality with it

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:20:44 2010 No.1809398

>>1809365

>I'm not sure why philosophyfags are raging that "Scientists think quantum events apply to large scale". It right in the fucking name QUANTUM

no one said scientists think it

a stupid poster in this thread thinks it, thats why philosophyfags jumped in to correct his idiocy

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:21:44 2010 No.1809401

>>1809334

>Evolutionary theory is just a guess lol

>it's gonna be thrown out the window in 20 years along with the big bang theory

>it'll be replaced by creationism and shit who the fuck knows

>every model is just an attempt, none are true or accurate, we only do science because it disproves god, not because we understand reality with it

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:23:44 2010 No.1809412 >>1809398 Nobody ever said that, philosophyfags believed something was said that was not, and corrected the strawman they created, because they fail.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:38:44 2010 No.1809478

>>1809412

Actually he did, and hes probably you, you retard

>>1809158

>>quantum mechanics has a profound influence on the deepest of philosophical questions

>>1809212
>>Quantum physics has shown that the universe doesn't have to follow what we consider logical.

---

Apparently some tard things properties at the quantum level not only negate LOGIC but also have consequences for DEEP philosophical questions, all of those questions take place at a macro level...

thus the poster (and probably you are him) are retarded and wrong

nothing at the quantum level has ramifications for LOGIC or Philosophy, it is only relevant for quantum mechanics itself and its program

which will be replaced soon

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:40:44 2010 No.1809488

>>1809401

>Evolutionary theory is just a guess lol

it is actually a very flimsy theory albeit "reasonable" and interesting theory and much better than creation myths

it will be changed, dont worry, everything in science changes and gets thrown out eventually

it'll probably be modified to hell

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:44:44 2010 No.1809497

SO we all agree

science produces no knowledge, no facts, no understanding of reality

science is a pragmatic tool for reaching some end, regardless if the method or theory is true.

science pales in comparison to philosophy in terms of intellectual rigor and scope.

science pales in comparison to art in terms of creativity, beauty and relevance to human life.

science, like the other trades, electricians, and plumbers and engineers, provides a VERY important function in society. Scientists are tools of society.

Scientists are little worker drones, like plumbers. They live trivial lives, but are necessary. We need ppl to dig ditches and people to make faster CPUS lol. Thnx.

When I want to know about reality and man, Ill read philosophy. When I want to learn about minerals and how a battery works I'll read science.
When I want fun and beauty ill observe art and literature.

Scientists are Philosophy's engineers. Cute little workers.

GTG philosophy has to create new branches of math and science and jurisprudence.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:45:44 2010 No.1809502 >>1809497 >Scientists are Philosophy's engineers. Cute little workers. WALL OF TEXT IS TRUTH. /thread

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:51:44 2010 No.1809525
File: 11 KB, 386x381, 1275785944423.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>1809488
>it is actually a very flimsy theory albeit "reasonable" and interesting theory and much better than creation myths
>beyond reasonable doubt, backed up with shittone of evidence and data, verified by various other scientific disciplines and no contradictory evidence or ratonable alternatives at all = flimsy theory
oh you!

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:54:44 2010 No.1809536

>>1809525

u can't falsify it it can't be reproduced

any troubling evidence can be explained away with either "oh invalid evidence" or "this new phenomena accounts for it"

can't reproduce it, even if we could reproduce some evolution (like in a fly) it doesnt imply it happened in the past and to every species, etc.

too many problems with it, it's based on induction too much, like sherlock holmes, where theres smoke there's fire...but not always the case

evolution is JUST a theory, albeit an interesting one

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 03:58:44 2010 No.1809553 >>1809536 Do we really have to go through this creationists arguments once again?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:04:44 2010 No.1809560 >>1809536 so how do you rationalize a fossil record with a consistent pattern of gradually diverging lifeforms in chronological order?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:04:44 2010 No.1809562 File: 127 KB, 1024x768, 1285226554566.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1808983

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:06:44 2010 No.1809569 So then philosophy found any answers to anything yet Thats right i didn't think so.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:08:44 2010 No.1809577

>>1809502 Scientists are Philosophy's engineers.

Scientists apply empirical naturalistic philosophy.
Lawyers apply legal philosophy.
Preachers apply theological philosophy.
Artists apply aesthetic philosophy
UK polotitians apply parliamentary sovereignty philosophy.
Plumbers apply plumbing philosophy.

For the tenth time: Philosophy is any systematic means of acquiring knowledge, and using these systems is science, art, law, plumbing, etc.

Arguing if science is better than philosophy is as retarded as arguing if Superman is better than the concept of superheroes.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:09:44 2010 No.1809581 Darwin proved that science is all that matters. Philosofags be all the angry you want.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:11:44 2010 No.1809590 >study philosophy and get some real knowledge >study philosophy and get real knowledge >philosophy real knowledge GTFO

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:12:44 2010 No.1809594 >>1809581 Actually, if you read Darwin correctly he proved that being able to adapting just enough to pass on your genes is all that really matters. Even science is small time compared to that, everything is just icing on the cake.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:12:44 2010 No.1809595 Philosophy applied THC Have fun acting deep stonerfag while getting paid nothing as a philosopher while science answers the real questions.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:12:44 2010 No.1809599

>>1809536
>can't reproduce it, even if we could reproduce some evolution (like in a fly) it doesnt imply it happened in the past and to every species, etc.

so your argument is that if we split and atom in the lab it doesn't imply that it happens in nature?

sage for trolling

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:14:44 2010 No.1809608 >>1809334 >we only do science because it works, not because we understand reality with it >we only do science because it works, because we understand reality with it fixed it for you there

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:24:44 2010 No.1809639 words can't describe how stupid OP is

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:38:44 2010 No.1809678
File: 74 KB, 598x379, pop_godel.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Science provides a strong base for deriving empirical data while, however, devoid of axiomatic implications (laws) suited for consistency it cannot be understood traditionally as "true" or "false" in a broader sense. In consequence, many of the facts we have today will be devoid of context in the future because of the very nature of the falsifiability present within the system itself.

Philosophical progresses is often made with axiomatic insights similar to the ones made in pure mathematics. More often than not "things simple do not disappear" within the subtext of the field but rather they are refined.

Science can often change fast, with the discovery of a binding insight. Philosophical progress is often made slow, through technical awareness similar to linguistics.

Pic some what related, Godel and Popper.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:41:44 2010 No.1809682 >>1809678 And yet it works. (bitches).

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:44:44 2010 No.1809687 >>1809678 >implying philosophical axioms hold more value than empeirical facts

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 04:51:44 2010 No.1809707 Philosophers and scientist each hold certain axiomatic facts as evident. : [

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 05:19:44 2010 No.1809774

except that even if you believe that, we could form a theory that is true but we dont actually know it,

the "sheep in the field arguement" about knowledge is an example of that, (p.s. i said im talking about the truth part not the knowledge part)

and the same can be said about philosophy, most of philosophy is argueing over things that have no objective (or incredibly little objectivity) property to them, but then saying that it is 'true facts'

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 05:23:44 2010 No.1809782 >>1809334 umm except we do understand reality with it, and if quantum theory ends up being bullshit, then it will probably be a very big stepping stone towards understanding reality better

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 05:29:44 2010 No.1809798 so much fucking samefagging in this fake outrage thread

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 05:32:44 2010 No.1809804

>>1809536

except that although maybe not for us with our current life span, technology etc, it would still be possible hypotheticly to reproduce evolution, this means it is still a falsafiable claim, where if you look at things like god etc that is an unfalsafiable claim. and when it comes down to genetics, if you did manage to see proof of macro evolution in a fruit fly it would imply that it happens to all other species too under the right conditions, if we witnessed macro evolution over multiple species of varying complexity, it would be borderline proof,

(But I would assume that if we found macro evolution in humans people would assume it happens to everything)

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 05:35:44 2010 No.1809814 >state that science can't know anything for sure >claim that philosophy is better because it doesn't even come close to trying Enjoy working at starbucks for the rest of your life

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 05:39:44 2010 No.1809821
File: 76 KB, 1141x538, hominids2_big (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>1809804 just a theory

Lol.
Doesn't understand what a theory or evolution are.

Pic related: It's a fact that humans evolved (changed over time) and a billion other animals we have fossils/phylogeny/DNA for did too.

Why they evolved (Natural Selection) is a theory in the way gravity is a theory for why things fall.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 05:50:44 2010 No.1809854

>>1809821
>>1809821
ummm yeah i did fuck that one up a bit!!!
I meant that if we witnessed proof of macro evolution over many species it would be borderline proof of evolution as a whole

this was more of a response to the person i was replying to who said even if we found evolution in a fruitfly it doesnt imply it happened in the past and to every species

and i know what a theory is, (including the theory of evolution) im just a bit shit at wording things

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 05:57:44 2010 No.1809877

>>1809814

<--- Has math and philosophy degree and is quite content making a lousy 50 grand a year working in an unrelated field.

Saying science is better than philosophy or vice versa will never really get much done other than give people with money less of a reason to fund either (not that philosophy needs much funding per say).

I wish more people with philosophy degrees had one in science as well...but for the most part undergraduate education doesn't stress the real importance and viability of science. I consider it intellectual suicide to presume otherwise...because science is not going away soon and people are just looking for reasons to cut anything else that doesn't promote visible progress.

Study math, physics, and philosophy and you might be able to make you cake and eat it too.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 06:01:44 2010 No.1809893 >>1809877 this is why im majoring in biochemistry, but im also doing psychology and philosophy papers as well

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 07:24:44 2010 No.1810143 Philosophy will never get u laid.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 07:28:44 2010 No.1810150 File: 151 KB, 333x500, 2475075257_bcf4e3366a.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1808983

please stop, that word makes us look like turds Anonymous Mon Sep 27 07:31:44 2010 No.1810155
File: 53 KB, 300x300, mandl-mtv.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>1808990

>implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >imp4ying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >imp3lying >implying >implying

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 07:33:44 2010 No.1810160 >>1809260 that is an emission pattern from a spectrometer to identify a mixture

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 07:34:44 2010 No.1810162 >>1810150 U mad?

i love GREEN TEXT Anonymous Mon Sep 27 07:36:44 2010 No.1810166
File: 108 KB, 300x300, sandg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

..
>implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implyiFg >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implyXg >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying
AND I USE IMPLYING AT THE START OF A SENTENCE BECAUSE I AM A MORON.

MellowRepublic !!cfI02QQenC9 Mon Sep 27 07:36:44 2010 No.1810169

Knowledge in itself is irrelevant to the real world.
We're given a set of scientific laws that we perceive as truth. They are defined by us and are fit to please us. Now, they're most likely correct. Because everything's working out and there's been a lot of proof. But I still remain philosophical about it. But on the other hand, I try not to think about knowledge in such a way, especially since I study physics and psychology.

>>	aether//Newfags; casuals of the internet! !Nki2423RDE Mon Sep 27 07:40:44 2010 No.1810175 >>1810169 >implying correct Correct through the logic of science, 'one' 'word' 'quantum physics' - which are all lies. Completely wrong through the logic of nature, 'opposites'.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 07:41:44 2010 No.1810178 >>1810143 Science will never get u laid, nerdatron...

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:06:44 2010 No.1810931 Scientists are Philosophy engineers Lawyers are Moral Philosophy engineers Everything is subordinate to Philosophy feels good man.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:08:44 2010 No.1810936

Science only has theories, inductive guesses, nothing is true. Everything will change eventually.

No point to study something that'll be different in a few years from now.

No point to study something that doesn't even model reality accurately.

Science is only good as a job, a trade, like plumbing and carpentry. But in the grand scheme of things it does not inform or enlighten anyone.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:08:44 2010 No.1810938 >Everything is subordinate to Philosophy I tend to agree, well said.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:09:44 2010 No.1810940 >>1810931 Must feel good to be relapsing into depression. Take your fucking medication and get off 4chan Mikel.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:09:44 2010 No.1810942 >>1810178 CH4 + Cl2 → CH3Cl + HCl CH3Cl + Cl2 → CH2Cl2 + HCl CH2Cl2 + Cl2 → CHCl3 + HCl Distill.

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:10:44 2010 No.1810945

>>1810936

>Science is only good as a job

Of course, who argued otherwise? NO ONE.
I dunno what you're going on about...

Ppl dont learn science because it reveals truths about the world, they study science because it gets them jobs. Scientists are just as clueless as Cooks and Firefighters....

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:26:44 2010 No.1810995

>>1809478
>all of those questions take place at a macro level...

Says who? The universe is the universe at any level, and all levels are important. Apparently philosophers are extremely anthropocentric to think that questions are only important if they're at the same level we exist at. When you ask a question like, "what does it mean to exist?" quantum mechanics changes the way you can look at it at the smallest levels, due to wavefunctions and multiple paths, granted its only for very small things, but it still says some startling things about the nature of reality. You just like to create strawmen.

And by the way, I WAS the one who you think said something I didn't, you just enjoy reading meanings into things that aren't there, like all great theologians.
>>1810945

>Ppl dont learn science because it reveals truths about the world, they study science because it gets them jobs.

Feynmann, Einstein, Hawking, etc. would all like a word with you. I study science because it teaches me the way that nature really is. You study philosophy because you can't reconcile your thoughts with reality. The simple fact that we have a philosophyfag using creationist arguments shows why pure philosophy is shit tier.

Go get your philosophy degree and maybe someday you can think a thought as profound and worthless as, "I can imagine a perfect being, one requirement of perfection is existence, therefore god exists." I am tired of philosophers who don't realize they're studying something to learn how to do what scientists were born being able to do.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:28:44 2010 No.1811002 >>1810143 > this is what scientists really believes If you're a philosophy student, it means you'll always have something to talk about and be an interesting person. I know I've had my fair share of fun thanks to it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:30:44 2010 No.1811010 >>1811002 >>Assuming you need schooling to talk out your ass all day.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:32:44 2010 No.1811015 >>1811010 >implying philosophy students aren't so handicapped that they desperately need those 3 years to function on the same level as someone studying science

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:32:44 2010 No.1811018 >>1811010 you can learn all you want about philosophy by just day dreaming everyday

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:33:44 2010 No.1811019 File: 10 KB, 141x150, 1269176994226.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1811010 Why do you think I implied that? Just told you philosophy helped me get laid.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:34:44 2010 No.1811023 File: 1.98 MB, 264x204, 1284597546724.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1811015 >>Imply... nevermind, fucking true.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:34:44 2010 No.1811026 >>1811018 That's like saying you can know everything there is to know about science by just starring out of a window

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:35:44 2010 No.1811029 >>1811026 no, philosophy is a subject completely enclosed in your mind, you do not have to go anywhere

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:35:44 2010 No.1811030 >>1811019 Women will listen to anything that is on their wavelength, that is about all philosophy is useful for. Still, goodjob tricking the small minded.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:38:44 2010 No.1811035 >>1811030 i guess these philosophers are so much higher up than me because they can just have sex with any women and i require more than just a vagina

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:38:44 2010 No.1811036 >>1811029 The comparison is still valid. All you have to do is have a look at the world, and you'll know everything there is to know about science. By your reasoning

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:39:44 2010 No.1811038 File: 19 KB, 274x189, 91523004.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] philosophy will ruin existence for you. stay dumb and happy, you'll thank me later.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:39:44 2010 No.1811039 >>1811036 well actually yes... you just need to know where to look

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:39:44 2010 No.1811040 >>1811030 >>1811035 > butthurt virgins detected > I can ad hom as well, am I cool tyet?

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:40:44 2010 No.1811043

>>1811036
Actually pretty true, it's just the world has a lot more to it then just staring out the window, and we've been working on sorting out the world at all its levels for a while. Philosophy is just all thought-not necessarily connected with reality, science applies thought to extract patterns from nature.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:41:44 2010 No.1811049 >>1811039 Hah, told you I was right

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:42:44 2010 No.1811051 >>1811043 philosophy is un-tested science

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:43:44 2010 No.1811053 >>1811043 Not really, science just apply philosophical models worked out by philosophers so engineers can just apply scientific models worked out by scientists. They're the middle man. SOMEONE has to collect all the data and report it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:45:44 2010 No.1811054 >>1811051 > Implying philosophy is a branch of science > Implying it isn't the opposite Read ANY book on scientific history before implying stuff like this

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:46:44 2010 No.1811059 >>1811053 So wait, what philosophical models do scientists use? I mean, I guess you could mean reason and logic, but those existed before philosophy, and are pretty much set. What new models has philosophy created that scientists use?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:51:44 2010 No.1811075 i have a feeling that everyone in this thread believes science is better and this whole thread is either made up of the trolls or the trolled

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:52:44 2010 No.1811077 File: 86 KB, 433x480, Whats-the-matter-too-deep-for-you.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I think philosophy is the mother of the human knowledge. It doesn't mean science doesn't matter, it just mean philosophy is important.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:52:44 2010 No.1811078 University sucks. Philosophy and science are great. I think we are going to find that studying the concept of an idea will give understanding of reality

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:53:44 2010 No.1811081 >>1811075 Looks like cleanup on aisle four.

>>	Get a Job Mon Sep 27 12:54:44 2010 No.1811084 File: 117 KB, 250x249, Thomas[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Why?

:D !!s2uh28knASO Mon Sep 27 12:58:44 2010 No.1811091
File: 831 KB, 1221x762, Complexity-map-overview.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Gödel already probe that logic is a failed field..
and isn't philosophy heavily based in logic?..

fuck pure philosophy is a fucking waste.. you want to transcend, study cutting edge science (anything related in my pic), Cosmology, and do a lot of LSD/DMT/THC..

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 12:59:44 2010 No.1811094 >>1811077 I don't know why 4chan doesn't have a Philosophy board yet

>>	:D !!s2uh28knASO Mon Sep 27 13:01:44 2010 No.1811097 >>1811094 u mean a /tro/ board?

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:02:44 2010 No.1811098

philosophy sucks cocks.science creates atomic bomb.science creates genetical engineered viruses.science buttrapes philosophyfags.science wins.
niggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersage
niggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersage
niggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersage
niggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersageniggersage

>>	GodofCider Mon Sep 27 13:03:44 2010 No.1811101 File: 34 KB, 760x378, 171.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1811094 The trolling would never end.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:03:44 2010 No.1811103 >>1811098 /sci/ perfect example

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:05:44 2010 No.1811109 >>1811077 I was thinking about some new boots, you fit the bill.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:09:44 2010 No.1811116 File: 66 KB, 344x392, 1283980909302.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] OM NOM NOM NOM solve this philosophy fags

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:12:44 2010 No.1811126 How has philosophy actually explained reality?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:12:44 2010 No.1811127 >>1811116 Poor guy, is he still alive?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:18:44 2010 No.1811141 ITT: sciencefags trying to argue with their superior philosophy overlords As a student of Literature and Music I laugh at your petty squabbles.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:19:44 2010 No.1811143 >>1811141 Literature and music are heavily influenced, modified and infused with meaning by Philosophy. for instance, Hesse or Wagner...any literature or music that is worth a damn has philosophical undertones and implications deal with it music nerd

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:20:44 2010 No.1811145 >>1811143 of course, but why the need to argue?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:23:44 2010 No.1811154 still waiting for philosophy fags to explain to me what reality is and how does it work...lol

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:29:44 2010 No.1811171

>>1811059

> So wait, what philosophical models do scientists use?

Inductive reasoning. Dividing knowledge into different branches. The scientific method. The principle of falsification is what, 50 years old?

And saying that reasoning and logic came before philosophy is retarded, when you're studying them and finding out how to use em, you're de facto doing philosophy

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:32:44 2010 No.1811185 >>1811154 "reality" is a pretty vague word. You need to be more precise what you're out after.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:40:44 2010 No.1811213 File: 258 KB, 616x645, Pain_Series_Worthy_Entrails.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] this is reality explain it

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 13:48:44 2010 No.1811232 >>1811213 Really bad fistula

Anonymous Mon Sep 27 14:19:44 2010 No.1811292
File: 25 KB, 225x289, epicurus.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

-Majoring in Philosophy=
-Good writing, logic, and critical reading skills=
-Getting good LSAT,GRE,MCAT,GMAT scores=
-Going to Graduate School=
-Get JD---MBA---MD---PhD=
-Living good life, making decent or alot of money=
-Die

/thread

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 14:34:44 2010 No.1811324 File: 150 KB, 980x530, fg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1808983

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 14:34:44 2010 No.1811326 >>1811292 >good writing >alot

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 14:39:17 2010 No.1811342 >>1811326 lol... a lot....happy? Jesus Christ...way to nitpick, faggot.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 14:46:34 2010 No.1811366 >>1811342 Your use of elipsis are annoying me.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 14:50:25 2010 No.1811385 >>1811324 This must be 90% of the trolls in /sci represented in anons art.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 15:42:34 2010 No.1811618 >>1809083 >>1809083 >>1809083 >>1809083 >>1809083 >>1809083 >>1809083 >>1809083 >>1809083 >>1809083 fuck this thread i am bumping because i hate /sci/ >>1809083 >>1809083 >>1809083

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 15:43:39 2010 No.1811625 >>1811618 Why do you hate sci?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 15:44:21 2010 No.1811631 >>1811625 I think because we drew representations of OP, and he is butthurt.

>>	sage sage Mon Sep 27 15:46:29 2010 No.1811647 >>1811625 >I realized no science theory will ever be true or describe objective reality. >171 posts and 23 image replies omitted

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 15:48:54 2010 No.1811653 >>1811647 SO we should just give up?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 15:50:00 2010 No.1811659 >>1811653 What is there to argue with someone determined to give up reason and the frontal cortex of their mind. Let them become autistic.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 27 15:53:26 2010 No.1811668 >>1811653 That's like saying that engineers should stop building shit just because they don't understand all of it. Now get back to work and collect those samples.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math