/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.9742029]

ITT: trigger /sci/ with one image

[Anonymous No.9742063]

>>9742029
well, the fact that science is wrong about almost everything is pretty factible
humans are the most intelligent form of life on earth but it doesn't mean shit actually. In fact humans aren't capable of knowing anything perfectly and this has been proven thousands of times through history (i.e. when science itself dismantled a previous scientific fact)

[Anonymous No.9742065]

>>9742063
Try being pseudo intellectual again when you can unify quantum gravity and general relativity.

[Anonymous No.9742068]

>>9742029

Does it keep what we know currently from being useful? the majority of the time, no.

[Anonymous No.9742072]

>>9742065
not even trying to be anything lol
anyone with a bit of knowledge on the matter can tell that I'm not giving a really deep analysis on that

[Anonymous No.9742342]

fine I'll take the bait

the author seems to make a case for consciousness beyond the physical world that doesn't get addressed by "materialistic reductionism"

plus his website hits all the marks with UFO's, parapsychology, DNE's, psychics, magic, etc.

>Deepak Chopra did it better

[Anonymous No.9742412]

>>9742063
>wrong about almost everything
>humans aren't capable of knowing anything perfectly
Lrn2false-dichotomy

[Anonymous No.9742453]

>>9742029
Science is wrong about everything. Only fedoras would think otherwise.

[Anonymous No.9742563]

>>9742029
Science is necessarily wrong, yes, but a better question is: what does it mean to be "right"? It's an extremely difficult question. And I sure hope you aren't a naïve realist, OP.

[Anonymous No.9742870]

>>9742029
What is this bullshit?

[Anonymous No.9743027]

>Science scientific facts disagree with your opinion
>I know, it must be science who is wrong!
This is literally how 99% of the world thinks so I am not surprised that there is a book displaying this popular opinion.
People love their Iphone but hate the ideas that formed it and modern civilization.

[Anonymous No.9743068]

>>9743027
>inb4 science is a social construct
>inb4 colonial science vs. indigenous "science"

[Anonymous No.9743130]

>>9742029
If anyone can find the video it’s a hoot and half. But fuck, it angered me very much. I’m still searching for the link

Her premise is that gravitational forces from celestial bodies are always pulling on us and thus when we are born (she claims we are malleable) these forces metaphysically and physically shape is into a certain horoscope.

[Anonymous No.9743136]

>>9743130
Found it, she changed her name

https://youtu.be/you57_xc32E

In case anyone asks, my fiend wants study astronomy and we make fun of him and one day we felt like debunking some videos and found it

[Anonymous No.9743145]

>>9743130
>329 views

Do you really want to entertain all the loons who ever posted a video? After all: "The amount of energy need to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."

[Anonymous No.9743152]

[Anonymous No.9743154]

>>9743145
You know, you’re absolutley right
I guess I should’ve thought one through

[Anonymous No.9743155]

>>9742342
>>Deepak Chopra did it better
That's true. Researchers are all starving to death while Deepak's drowning in green and puss.

[Anonymous No.9743164]

So we know the government is misinforming us about gravity and the shape of the earth, how do we know they are telling the truth about the existence of atoms? Like do you really believe everything is made from combinations of elements, ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.9743169]

>>9743130
You can laugh of that, but keep in mind we have a Myers-Briggs thread here every day. I put a horoscope definition in one, re-labeled it "INFJ" and everyone was immediately "OMG THAT'S SO ME!"

[Anonymous No.9743170]

>>9743164
See I’ve always wondered that, kinda.

Is it possible to come up with an alternative view of the world that comes up with similar results and predictions m? If so, how hard would it be to lie to the public and instead teach them this view and not the real thing?

[Anonymous No.9743172]

>>9743164
are there websites denying the existence of atoms?

[Anonymous No.9743185]

>>9743170
Creationism and Electric Universe are being taught in some schools, so yes. Flat Earth is probably being taught in some schools as well. It isn't hard, so long as the listeners don't actually question things, and assume all the rest of the world is conspiring to lie to them or is otherwise brainwashed.

The people who actually allow their view of the universe to be challenged, rather than continuously seek to confirm it, sadly, make up a minority of the population.

This also, sadly, includes people who actually advocate mainstream science, and they often end up flipping out and sticking to old model ideas, when said science changes. Once you're comfortable in your intuition as to how the world works, it can be very difficult to change.

>>9743172
Of course there are:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyg-OrpXJCo

There are people who believe the population counts are faked, because there isn't enough air on the planet to support more than a billion people, nor enough time to make that many since the designated religious beginning of man. Rule #34 goes far beyond porn, and like a lot of that porn, it's always been with us, just not so readily accessible.

[Anonymous No.9743220]

[Anonymous No.9743230]

>>9743220
he was the ultimate engineer

[Anonymous No.9743268]

>>9743230
>inb4 engie memes

[Anonymous No.9743400]

[Anonymous No.9743424]

>>9743400
My fellow person of African descent.

[Anonymous No.9743475]

>>9743164
>So we know the government is misinforming us
How do we know this?

[Anonymous No.9743479]

>>9743475
Their accounts of what happened at Roswell didn't corroborate

[Anonymous No.9743480]

>>9743268
[math] \pi = e = 3 [/math]

[Anonymous No.9743491]

>>9742063

Reasonably accurate statement. But what science does have going for it is that it is, by a landslide, the most compelling method of learning about the world.

[Anonymous No.9743496]

[Anonymous No.9743499]

>>9743491
Largely because, unlike nearly every previous method of describing how the world works (and 99.99% of this board), science is open to being wrong about everything.

[Anonymous No.9743530]

>>9743172
That’s a great idea. I’ll go make one. Does anyone know of scientific papers written in the Middle Ages that explain the existence of matter through means other than elements? I think we could target flattards.

[Anonymous No.9743613]

>>9743530
Articles on alchemy (still technically elements, but just four-five) are actually kinda interesting. Not for their scientific value, but for their commentary on how people thought about the world at the time. Various metals and such having values based on religious symbolism and ideals - which, yes, would work well for the flat and electric universe tards.

A "friend" of mind, actually kinda temporarily brainwashed my kids into thinking the universe works based on the logic presented in Mage: The Ascension tabletop RPG magic system, as he decided to run a game with them while he was babysitting them. Whatever he told them about was really elaborate, and they really ran with it. When we got back, they starting to describe mundane events (like how bleach removes colors from clothes) as interactions between the Wyrm, Weaver, and Gia, and functions of the nine spheres of magic. Bastard had them for just three days, and I swear, they knew that game better than I did, and I played it for near a decade - but I never tried applying the thought process to every little thing in my life.

Took awhile to deprogram them, but they still make comments about it, especially when they see something political on the news, "It's the fucking Technocracy again!" just, sorta jokingly.

They had a faction in that game called the Sons of Ether that I swear some recurring shitposter here is under the delusion he is a part of:
http://whitewolf.wikia.com/wiki/Sons_of_Ether
(Which I guess makes the rest of us part of the aforementioned Technocracy plot.)

[Anonymous No.9744223]

>>9742453
You omitted the "almost", for reasons of agenda.

[Anonymous No.9744227]

>>9744223
Finally someone pointed this out. The correct terminology is almost fedoras.

[Anonymous No.9744230]

← not scientists, but YOU

[Anonymous No.9744555]

>>9743479
Assuming your statement is true: How is one event indictive of a general policy?

[Anonymous No.9744566]

>>9744223
Anything that can be certain of is too trivial to be counted as science.

[Anonymous No.9744804]

>>9742029
lel

[Anonymous No.9746682]

>>9742029
This is true though
a better way to put it is we have no way of telling if the science we are doing is actually the complete picture of reality

[Anonymous No.9746955]

>>9746682
Science itself tells us the picture is incomplete, and may never be complete, and there are many unempirical things that remain beyond its privy and may always remain so.

Still, best we got in terms of "how shit works", and expanding that information.