[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 70 KB, 300x400, 300-randi1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4290240 No.4290240 [Reply] [Original]

The whole "skeptic" movement is as ignorant and religious as the homoeopathy movement, it has turned into a huge circlejerk and dismisses anything it finds even slightly out of the ordinary(even real scientifically proven things like candida infections, parasites, iodine deficiency, government coverups, austrian economics, the federal reserve) as junk science automatically without fully investigating it. Even if they do check it out a tiny bit, they get the tiniest bit of information from a propaganda source and strawman the entire fucking thing.

Look there are real pseudo-science frauds out there like homoeopathy, ufos, astrology, marxism, and TIME CUBE but you have to keep an open mind, a real open mind and see things from other people's point of view(even if it seems batshit insane).

Am I wrong?

>> No.4290244

I was with you until you brought politics into it.

>> No.4290246

>austrian economics

0/10

>> No.4290250

>>4290246
>literally believing funnelling money to goldman sachs and obama's re-election campaign helps the economy in any way

0/10

>> No.4290251

>>4290244
>I was with you until you brought politics into it.
But it's the same exact kind of mentality.

>> No.4290258

Economics isn't a science.

>> No.4290261

I feel the same way OP. There's an endless reading list of books by people involved in the government's PSIOPS program from the 60s attesting to the existence of psionic abilities. Good luck getting a 'skeptic' to read any of it though.

>> No.4290263

>>4290258
Yes it is.

It tells you what is and is not possible in reality.

You can't build a house if you don't have enough bricks.

If an economist told you this, you would tell him economics isn't a science.

>> No.4290264

>>4290261
OP here.
>psychics

Nice try pseudo-intellectual shit troll.

Your blind allegiance to authority is clearly seen.

>> No.4290269

>>4290263
If that's what economics amounts to, then no, economics is not a science

>> No.4290288

>>4290264

Fuck off. You're being just as closed minded as you accuse skeptics of being. You didn't ask to see any sources or for links to any books, you just dismissed it snidely without any thought.

>> No.4290292

>>4290261
Thanks for proving op right.

>> No.4290296
File: 52 KB, 632x589, 1325353580437.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4290296

>>4290288

>> No.4290303

>>4290240
>Am I wrong?

Yes, skeptics have absolutely nothing against out of the ordinary. Its the rejection of ideas which aren't supported by observation/experiment.
Substantial claims require substantial evidence, (which most 'out of the ordinary' claims are).

Sure that means things will not be accepted until there are observations and experiments, but that is the safest and most logical solution.


Your picture is of that British magician who helped crack the bullshit water memory experiment right?
Is this a sly hint that you are a believer of water memory?

>> No.4290309

>>4290303

It's not fair though. Just let ghosts or some shit exist so the world can be exciting and not dull as fuck.

>> No.4290312
File: 959 KB, 656x656, sagan_cancer.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4290312

>Tube Cube

I think we have bigger fish to fry... frankly.

>> No.4290317

>>4290309
>It's not fair though

How is it not fair?
One thing i think scientists know best, and others need to understand is how hard it is to truly know something.
It is impossible to declare we understand something completely unless we understand everything.
Things we may think are related, things that we have tested before may simply be coincidences, we have to be so careful and thorough with experiments to safely make conclusions.

It is simply unreasonable to believe things without evidence and experiment, it's actually dangerous. If you want to believe things simply because they satisfy an emotion, people could delude themselves into all kinds of nonsense (like many still do).

It may seem 'better' to you or others if something was the case, but science doesn't care about what 'should' be the case, merely what 'is' the case.

>> No.4290321

>>4290317

Shut the fuck up autist nobody understands any of that, not asking for a lot here just let something exist that is amazing and cool, and stop saying everything that isn't boring doesn't exist. I don't want to live in a shitty dull boring world but you are keeping it that way.

>> No.4290323
File: 54 KB, 480x360, redblue_pill.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4290323

>>4290321
>just let something exist that is amazing and cool
I see you are a blue pill kinda guy.

The matrix was amazing and cool to some, it wasn't satisfying enough for others. Why don't you leave /sci/ for the big boys~

>> No.4290328

>>4290309
>not dull as fuck
>scientists unweave the fantabulous complexity of reality and reveal the clockwork of the universe
>dull
You people make me sick. Talk to a scientist about his work sometime. If he's worth his weight he'll talk you ear off, gushing, with eyes gleaming. A lot of scientists are passionate about their work and find it absolutely captivating, especially when they discover something new.
Just because to you it sounds technical and uncomprehensible that doesn't make it dull and require you to invent fairies at the bottom of the garden. It's telling you to educate yourself, even if it's through a pop-sci documentary. Watch some fucking Sagan - he's really good at purveying the awe that science lets us tap.

>> No.4290329

>>4290309
http://3d.xkcd.com/877/

>> No.4290337

>>4290303
>Your picture is of that British magician who helped crack the bullshit water memory experiment right?
Is this a sly hint that you are a believer of water memory?

What the fuck are you talking about?

How dare you disgrace James Randi

>> No.4290339

>>4290328
>>4290323

I am not even talking about that, what are you talking about holy shit

Listen to me close this time so you get it

For some stupid reason we got to a point in the world where something is only true when old-ass athiest scientists say it is. That's bullshit and unfair, athiesm is only 1 point of view, they shouldn't have all the say in what's true, and of course they are gonna say stuff like ghosts and shit is untrue because it's against athiesm, they are only gonna say things are true that support athiesm because they are bias. I am just saying wherever they decide things are true or not they need to have one guy from every point of view so they can all have a say in it and not just athiest scientists, that's basic fairness.

>> No.4290342

>>4290337
>>4290337

You have made a horrible mistake.
OP is criticizing skeptics (i.e. James Randi), so i was asking him he is a believer in water memory or something.
I love James Randi lol.....

p.s. learn to read

>> No.4290344

>>4290342
OP and the guy you are replying to here, I love James Randi.

he just makes some mistakes sometimes.

You're an idiot.

>> No.4290346
File: 96 KB, 251x219, 1326353078610.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4290346

>>4290339
Wow you are a poor troll.

>> No.4290347

>>4290339
>is only true when old-ass athiest scientists say it is

Maybe you don't understand science, or the world, but that is not how science works.

Science is not intrinsically related to atheism, just because one person is an atheist does not mean they get heard or credited more. Science rejects authority/reputation, it only deals with observation and experiment.

>they are only gonna say things are true that support athiesm

Science is all about challenging ideas and finding the truths. This means people are constantly questioning and trying to prove others wrong, again it is all about observation and experiment.

>> No.4290348 [DELETED] 

>>4290344
I didn't imply you hated him, i asked IF you were a believer of something he dismissed.

And it seems i was right. Look out their are ghosts in your clothes.

P.s. learn to read and think

>> No.4290351

>>4290347
>replying to a troll

>>4290348
No I don't believe in ghosts or water healing or water memory or any of that mystic stuff. The point is that the skeptic movement has created a bunch of douchbags that don't actually investigate things but instead blindly worship "skeptics" who themselves are douchebags who don't know what they're talking about.

anyways imr eally drunk watsup?

>> No.4290354

>>4290344

I didn't imply you hated him, i asked IF you were a believer of something he dismissed.

And it seems i was right. Look out there are ghosts in your clothes.

P.s. learn to read and think
P.p.s. i had to delete and repost to fix a spelling mistake i couldn't live with

>> No.4290356

>>4290351
>The point is that the skeptic movement has created a bunch of douchbags

I don't necessarily disagree with that.
However your whole argument is that "The whole "skeptic" movement is as ignorant and religious" movement.
Firstly people who aren't actually skeptics, just people who suck the teet of skeptics wouldn't be defined as skeptics, so it is a stretch to include them in the skeptic movement yet alone the 'whole' skeptic movement.

Second, it isn't the skeptic movements fault people do this, it is basically human nature and the confirmation bias.

>> No.4290357

>marxism
>anti-intellectual

nah

>> No.4290359

This whole "keep an open mind" bullshit is the thing that really annoys the fuck out of me. If something sounds batshit insane, as the OP puts it, then in all likely hood it probably is and shouldn't be given any kind of attention.

And a skeptic movement? I haven't noticed any kind of movement. Maybe people are slowly evolving out of idiocy?

>> No.4290361

>>4290357

Disregard that, I obviously am not familiar with the history of the belief system that I espouse. I also have a large number of penises in my mouth.

>> No.4290362

>>4290361
>typical philistine

>> No.4290363

>>4290362

> typical marxist.

How is Cloud Cuckoolander, by the way?

>> No.4290364

>>4290363
Had to look that up as I do not pay attention to mindless drivel on the idiot box, how is being sub-par in everything you pursue?

>> No.4290365

>>4290357
>marxism
>pseudo-intellectual

yeah

>> No.4290370

>>4290365
care to back that statement up?

>> No.4290373

Fuck skeptics man. There's too many skeptic scientists these days.

>> No.4290374

>>4290364

> Disdain for an entire medium of artistic expression.
> I IS ARTFUL AND HAS GUD TASTE

Enjoy your state broadcasts.

>> No.4290375

>>4290351
You're right that there are a ton of self-proclaimed skeptics that just go off of what other more famous skeptics espouse. But why would these so called skeptics be douchebags in the first place? Because they are at least attempting not to take everything at face value and want some sort of evidence? The good ones do that. I know you're talking about the blind follower types though.

It's funny though how you said that when "they" look up the tiniest information about a subject that that source is propaganda against it. Maybe it's really just bullshit after all?

>> No.4290378

>>4290374
I don't even own a television subscription, it's just vapid.

>> No.4290381
File: 10 KB, 323x313, new mona lisa.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4290381

>>4290364

> mfw On the side of the arts, yet insults an entire medium.

> Also mfw never seen 'The Wire.'

Seriously, as a Baltimore resident, please fuck your own face.

>> No.4290384

>>4290378

See: >>4290381

and follow instructions.

>> No.4290389

>>4290378

Pseudo-intellectual alarm! Pseudo-intellectual alarm! Pseudo-intellectual alarm! Pseudo-intellectual alarm! Pseudo-intellectual alarm! Pseudo-intellectual alarm! Pseudo-intellectual alarm! Pseudo-intellectual alarm!

Because nothing good has ever aired in the history of television programming ever, ever.

>> No.4290395

>>4290375
not op or whoever you were talking to but

what i don't like about most skeptics is the idea that EVERYONE, specially scientists, should be skeptics. I don't think that is correct.

>> No.4290399

You know, these "skeptics" usually compose of wannabe scientists who could make it in academia. They would probably claim quantum mechanics as pseudo-science if given the chance.

I'd like to hear randy's opinion on spooky action at a distance

>> No.4290402

I somewhat agree.

It seems as though by rejecting even the idea of some sort of life after death, you're an intellectual.

>> No.4290403

>>4290389
you know you can watch stuff you like online/download it, right?

>> No.4290405

>>4290381
Have not
>insight to socio-political thoughts
Like what?
>>4290389
If you have any suggestions, I'd like to see them.

If you could answer me, have you people always watched TV? I haven't owned a subscription for my entire life , so I can see how you can be absorbed in it (addicted to shortsighted pleasure).

>> No.4290407
File: 19 KB, 707x638, new mona lisa 3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4290407

>>4290403

> doesn't realize that downloading stuff online and enjoying it is still participating in that medium

Because when I download a .pdf of a book and enjoy it, it's not the exact same thing as purchasing that book and enjoying sans paying for it.

>> No.4290409

>>4290389

>pseudo-intellectual

I sure do love buzzwords. If I had a penny for every time THAT has been used incorrectly or unnecessarily.

>> No.4290410

>>4290405

That's absolutely right! BURN EVERYTHING THAT ISN'T A BOOK BECAUSE NOTHING SHITTY HAS EVER BEEN PUBLISHED IN A BOOK LOLZ.

>> No.4290411

>>4290410
I actually spend 99% more time reading non-fiction than fiction (usually arxiv too), keep grasping at straws though.

>> No.4290412

>>4290409

It's used correctly.

Funny, I thought "buzz-words" was only a TV term, but then you did say you didn't watch TV... Odd.

>inb4 I'M NOT THAT GUY LOL

>> No.4290413

>>4290411

Sure. And everything that's non-fiction is 100% true.

>> No.4290415

>>4290412

Well, I'm not that guy actually you dense sack of shit.

Enjoy your pointless argument.

>> No.4290416

>>4290413
Now I am utterly confused, what is your point? And just because something can't be proven, doesn't mean it's not true.
>>4290412
I'm actually not that guy.

This is all me

>>4290411
>>4290405
>>4290378
>>4290364

>> No.4290418

>>4290407

the stupid thing about tv is the lack of choice and the commercials

so yes, it IS kind of different to watch shit online


also, not sure what "participating in the medium" means

>> No.4290420

>>4290357
>"value is objective and based on labour"
>not anti-intellectual

Seriously get the fuck out and kill yourself if you're too stupid to realize how dumb this is.

Go back to shitting yourself at your occupy protests.

>> No.4290422

>>4290413
>>4290416
>>4290418

lol

>> No.4290425

>>4290347
they are only gonna say things are true that support athiesm
Entirely, completely, ignorantly untrue.

I'd say half the scientists I know are religious, maybe 5 percent strongly so.

No part of the scientific paradigm allows the considerations of religion to be part of the decision -- it simply isn't possible.
However, as science has often been politically motivated
(usually due to financial, governmental, or project-access needs),
reputation and compromise are often part of it.
There is an inherent conflict when non-scientists (politicians)
try to decide what is better to fund, and who should do it
(and how the scientists deal or are pushed to deal with politics).

>> No.4290436

>>4290420
So value is determined by arbitrary systems? Are you saying that the wealth generated by cheap toys being marketed to young kids over and over (they break them on purpose so you keep buying them, can't remember what that's called), is useful wealth? There is a distinction to be made, and it isn't up to a price system.

>> No.4290438

>>4290436

Blah, Blah, Blah, I'm an undergraduate.

>> No.4290440

>>4290240
>candida infections

Since when was the skeptic movement in denial over the existence of yeast infections?

>> No.4290441

>>4290438
>I can't argue so I'll just attack him

>> No.4290443

>>4290441

I can't defend my position so I'll just post some cryptic bullshit.

>> No.4290445

>>4290443
>he thinks what I posted was cryptic
Oh wow buddy , I didn't think people were this dense!

>> No.4290449

>>4290436
>So value is determined by arbitrary systems?

No it's determined by subjective value. PERIOD.

Nothing else is needed to be said.

If you actually have the stupidity to question this then you have a severe mental disorder.

>> No.4290450

>>4290445

> If I avoid defending my position, it will seem stronger LOL

>> No.4290452

HAI IM AN SKEPTICAL IM SO FUCKING SMART CUZ IM AN ATHEIST I WATCH TED TALK VIDEOS ALL THE TIME BECUSE IM A GENIUS LOOK GUYS I CAN UNDERSTAND SCEINCE UNLIKE U RELIGIOSFAGS


atheists = pseudo-intellectuals

>> No.4290453

>>4290449
So then why is capitalism held to such regards?

>> No.4290455

>>4290436
>Are you saying that the wealth generated by cheap toys being marketed to young kids over and over (they break them on purpose so you keep buying them, can't remember what that's called), is useful wealth?

Are you actually denying toys do not generate value for children? They generate massive joy in children. It a greater joy than any children in past generations have been able to experience. Our culture is based on this. I remember growing up and getting my first gameboy and experiencing happiness with myself and my family.

You are a sadist.

Also those toys are only cheap because statists and socialists around the world(including usa) decide to manipulate their currency so people are not paid for what they produce.

>> No.4290456

>>4290436
value is contextual; can't be argued until you establish the range, or some definition's context.

The phrase you probably wanted was 'planned obsolescence;' it is usually misused.

People too often use 'obsolescence' to mean simply
that the item isn't the currently-sold model
(if you hear it in the computer industry, this is almost always the use, and it's wrong.)

>> No.4290459

>>4290455
Oh sure I am not denying the value of pleasure, however the point I was making is that many consumer electronics/appliances/etc (not explicitly children toys, even refrigerators), have planned obsolescence >>4290456 as this guy says. This is meant to generate more revenue by making the consumer repurchase a product he wouldn't have had to. Now this is ludicrous! But with capitalism it is a fact and even encouraged DIRECTLY. I don't offer an immediate solution, but this is a major criticism.

>> No.4290460
File: 22 KB, 606x721, new mona lisa 2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4290460

> mfw scientists dedicated to only falsifiable claims are lured into a pissing contest about unfalsifiable subject matter by a terrible troll.

Way to be, team.

>> No.4290463

>>4290453

Literally
>>4290455

No one
>>4290456

gives
>>4290459

a shit.

/pol/ is -------> that way, up its own ass with circle jerks and bullshit.

>> No.4290464

>>4290463
>circlejerk because you can't understand it
2deep4u

>> No.4290466

>>4290464

That's exactly why. You've nailed it. Now get the fuck out.

>> No.4290467

>>4290453
Capitalism permits opportunities and rewards work better than other systems.
Capitalism is a system of balanced principles, which means decision-making (which is often suspect) can be avoided entirely.

Unfortunately, capitalism is also affected by marketing, overreaching law, and is very easily abused by people who have power.
Executive favors, executive compensation, and executive politics all defeat the system as well as any.

>> No.4290468
File: 1.18 MB, 200x147, 1318112525829.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4290468

>>4290466

>> No.4290469

>>4290459
> This is meant to generate more revenue by making the consumer repurchase a product he wouldn't have had to.

If a company intentionally did this you wouldn't buy from them.

A lot of products I buy last a really long time.

Companies have to function with the resources allocated to them. They can only do so much. But as the economy grows so do standards. But the economy cannot grow nowadays because of this massive corporate/socialist central banking nightmare we have.

>> No.4290471

>>4290467
>Executive favors, executive compensation, and executive politics all defeat the system as well as any.

Then that is not capitalism, it is corporatism. Learn the difference.

>> No.4290472
File: 33 KB, 500x375, 1327311803308.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4290472

Derail successful.

>> No.4290475

>>4290469
But you would, and people do. You're thinking of some paradise where people actually think for more than 1 minute in advance. People don't. And that nightmare you talk of? That's just the result of capitalism. Marx predicted this exact occurrence, the only thing left is the transition.

>>4290472
Oh please, your shitty thread had nothing interesting to offer.

>> No.4290476

>>4290471
Corporatism requires the framework of capitalism;

I know the difference, you need not be smug.

Corporatism is not an economic system, as such.
It is a result of a corporate system, describing (limited) consequences of it.
It also is not necessarily restricted to capitalism, and, in case you weren't paying attention,
the question was about explaining why capitalism was held in such high regard.

So how does 'corporatism -- learn the difference' answer that question?

>> No.4290477

>>4290475
outright lie, (or clueless, ignorant selfishness) since you stayed for several remarks.
Self-defeating claim; it shows you to be dishonest and clueless.
Ignorant of the value of discussions and ignorant of the way people get stuff done.

Please, if you find no value in a discussion, stay out of it or fix it -- don't just criticize or troll.

>> No.4290494

>>4290395
That's just a philosophical perspective;
you could treat it like the others, and just disagree.

Actively hating it and the skeptics that believe that way is irrational and hurtful.

>> No.4290511

>>4290475
>Marx predicted this exact occurrence
>HUHUUHUUHUHUHUH
No.

Every single last thing marx said was wrong. The working class thrived, monopolies were destroyed, countless new businesses were created.

All of the "market failures" were the result of state intervention. Goldman sachs wouldn't be anywhere CLOSE to the size it is now if we has a free market, it would be very small.

It's time you wake up and unbrainwash yourself.

Read some rothbard or mises.

>> No.4290536

>>4290511

Winner by opponent ragequit.

>> No.4290545

>>4290511
Get the fuck out of /sci/. I'm not the guy you're responding to, but Austrian economics is basically a religious cult. It's great for low-IQ faggots who enjoy feeling intellectual while maintaining their simplistic, primitive notions of human behavior and interaction, but spare us.

>> No.4290547

>>4290536
Nope, automatic loser, here and in every post.

Because you didn't understand the game, the tactics, or the point.

Loser, loser!

>> No.4290548

>>4290547
>>4290545

Look who decided to return to /sci/ from /lit/!

Welcome back!

>> No.4290551

>>4290547
...and you prove you have no idea who you are speaking to,
and that you feel smug for your failures,
and that the pages you visit are automatically better?

You are a child; go read a book.

>> No.4290556

>>4290548
I think this is the funniest -- and most infuriating -- fact of inbred, indoctrinated trash like you. You pretend to be part of the groups of people you denounce. It's like when I read some comment on SciAm from a supposed scientist who can't spell and lacks even basic math skills, but claims he knows that global warming is a scam. It boils down to the fact that your frontal lobes just can't handle flexibility. You're going to believe the same stupid bullshit for the rest of your life, never realizing that when you die, your beliefs will die with you (Austrian economics included).

>> No.4290557

I think JREF is a pretty cool dude, eh overdoses on homeopathy and doesn't afraid of anything.

>> No.4290727

>>4290556

> SciAm

Lolz.

>> No.4290778

>Marxism

That's when your post revealed its true purpose.

>> No.4290794

>>4290545
>loosing the debate?
>shout religious

>> No.4290813

SKEPTICS : OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE

NUTJOBS : FAITH MAKES THE DELUSIONS REAL

>> No.4290819

I stopped listening to everyone a long time ago and not a single fuck was given. No time wasted, no fruitless buttmadstruation, no arguments. Anything that lives and functions as a group pushes an ideology and gradually narrows its views and closes up perpetuating a fundamentalist mentality.

>> No.4290834

>>4290813

>SKEPTICS
>NUTJOBS
false dilemma

>OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE
availability heuristics used to make association and composition fallacies

>FAITH MAKES THE DELUSIONS REAL
appeal to one's inner angsty teen