/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.14643321]

Believing in "the science" as a dogma is an antithesis to the subject of science itself? Why do so many redditors (and young people) unironically subscribe to ideas that "the science is settled" for so many topics? Are they genuinely cultists?

[Anonymous No.14643330]

>>14643321
when nonscientists argue amongst themselves over scientific topics, it turns out that the guy saying “trust the science” is actually less retarded than the guy saying “oh no noooo i can do my own science for myself”

an analogy is, say, if a bunch of english speakers with no knowledge of Latin are trying to argue over how to translate a Catullus poem. no matter what either side says, neither will learn how to translate latin poetry better than the guys who’ve already written translations based on study of the original material plus scholarship of the other scholars in the field plus just being experts who have gained credentials granted by the long heritage of past experts. nobody is going to sit on their computer doing google searches and learn how to translate Latin better than an actual Latin expert and if they think they can then they should go get a credential. until then your opinion is worthless and appeal to authority is legitimately a much much better and more reliable way to make judgements

[Anonymous No.14643334]

Because they haven't been taught what science is (or are too lazy to look it up on wikipedia). Also, people should make a distinction between formal and empirical sciences. Only empirical sciences necessarily rely on (empirical) evidence.

[Anonymous No.14643346]

>>14643330
>The smarter person is the one that relies on 1,000 year old logical fallacies like "appealing to authority"
Hello rplebbitor, Google a ton of IPCC papers today?

[Anonymous No.14643350]

>>14643334
Kek, I like your sense of humor but nows not the time.

..btw are you German by chance?

[Anonymous No.14643352]

>>14643346
the smartest person is the authority and when two brainlets argue about whether or not the authority is right then clearly the brainlet who thinks he is smarter than the authority is the bigger brainlet

[Anonymous No.14643356]

>>14643321
Because it’s not, you’re the retarded one op. The scientific community exists, it has always fucking existed, it’s a part of the scientific method, pretty much most of the parts (asking a question, hypothesizing, experimenting, analyzing the data, reporting the data). People should obviously be critical and analytical about it but it’s poo poo pee pee brain retarded to be like
>the scientific community is dogmatic and antithetical to science itself
It’s like not accepting that English exists as a language that many people agree on and that the dictionary just decides shit and it’s all indoctrination from Big Dictionary. The critical lens you’re working with is fantastic to live life with, life is complex and it’s important to be able to discern things, but you’re applying it in a very dumbass way, like just aggressively retarded.

[Anonymous No.14643357]

>>14643352
Oh 100% r/science fellow cultist. This is why I am currently experimenting with turning lead into gold while using leeches to cure my flu.

[Anonymous No.14643360]

>>14643356
If the dictionary flipped the script every half decade, I'd agree with you. In my life time I've seen the "experts" push milk onto children to be healthy, only to reverse course in less than 10 years claiming the cow farts are causing scary weather.

You are a cultist.

[Anonymous No.14643369]

>>14643356
>poo poo pee pee brain retarded
I take it that you are not a supporter of all poo poo times being pee pee times?

[Anonymous No.14643386]

>>14643357
>>14643360
so anon, what is your opinion on the earth being round? if i trust that fact without going to space and photographing it myself, does that make me a cultist just because i trust my science teachers and Bill Nye and Carl Sagan and (((NASA))) and [{[*<SpaceX>*]}]?

[Anonymous No.14643392]

>>14643386
How ironic, given the fact that "the scientific community" originally stipulated that theories against "flat Earth theory" was heresy. Thank you for proving my point

[Anonymous No.14643417]

>>14643392
you didn’t answer my question. want to try again? instead of making a one-sentence non-argument for something unrelated “ergo i proved my point”

honestly anon, i can tell from your tone here that you are buttblasted. there are plenty of folks who are buttblasted by science… young earth creationists, new age crystal lovers, “i invented muh free energy device” scammers, homeopathy nuts, shroud of turin catholics, people who watch Ghost Hunters, trannies, this list goes on and on. be honest, why are you butt blasted?

[Anonymous No.14643423]

>>14643417
Hahahahahahaha

[Anonymous No.14643438]

>>14643423
great comeback anon

[Anonymous No.14643445]

>>14643438
All it took was a 2 second google search, budro

[Anonymous No.14643452]

>>14643445
you needed to google “hahahaha”?

first time in a while i am getting the hint that this is a legit poorly-coded bot i’m replying to

[Anonymous No.14643453]

>>14643360
>You are a cultist
What I hate most about this stupid anti-science rhetoric is that it’s so deeply ignorant of the actual nature of the scientific community. What ((these)) people like OP and the person I’m replying to are asking for, that questioning nature, is like the vitae of the majority of the scientific community. These people don’t know how much scientific community agreement is driven by so much prior discussion and always has dissenters and how it’s all so critical and skeptic of itself that we can be essentially sure that whatever makes it through as a part of the consensus is literally just….shit that thousands of thousands of people went back and forth critiquing and could not refute. Even then it’s like we know that to be “not disproven” rather than actually verified. But even saying that triggers the shit out of them and makes them feel validated and it’s all just so fucking tiring to even deal with them.

But these poo poo brain low level IQ conspiritard propaganda guzzling dumbasses come in here thinking they fully invented skepticism or some shit and are revolutionaries for being openly aggressively ignorant of the actual process and community they’re spending soooo much time being pressed about but won’t spend the two seconds to look into. It’s sad but it’s also like they’re just so unreachable it’s exhausting and almost always not worth the effort.

[Anonymous No.14643460]

>>14643321
solution 1

[Anonymous No.14643464]

>>14643321
solution 2

[Anonymous No.14643468]

>>14643321
solution 3. Verification not required.

[Anonymous No.14643469]

>>14643452
Cannot tell if you're a chink or a bot kek

[Anonymous No.14643472]

So uh, anyone remember when the EPA poisoned the Colorado river?

[Anonymous No.14643475]

>>14643469
can we perform a turing test here? before we move on i would like you to tell me the species and minimum quantity of animals required to hear “quack” and “neigh” coming from a single barn

[Anonymous No.14643478]

>>14643475
Buddy, you think the gas you exhale is killing the planet. If anything you should think of horses when you hear homes, not zebras.

[Anonymous No.14643481]

>>14643475
>>14643478
Hooves*

[Anonymous No.14643485]

>>14643478
>>14643481
turing test failed. try again. otherwise we can be sure it’s some poorly programmed bot

[Anonymous No.14643498]

>>14643485
Fucking up a sentence due to autocorrect is the antithesis of bot posting, nigger.

[Anonymous No.14643511]

>>14643498
no, fucking up a sentence and making a repost is an easy thing to code into a bot.

can you tell me the solution to the barn turing test i posted above? the answer is not hard for any human and you’ve gotten it wrong 3 times now with gibberish machine-generated unrelated nonsense. want to make a 4th attempt, poorly trained Pytorch model?

[Anonymous No.14643512]

>>14643330
That's possibly the most retarded analogy you could've come up with, language is manmade, it's set in stone, natural phenomena are not manmade, they don't necessarily have a fixed definition and whatever definition you've come up with is not necessarily correct, unlike language which is just a bunch of made up descriptors

[Anonymous No.14643523]

>>14643512
more machine-generated unrelated gibberish.

care to answer the question about the sounds coming from the barn posted above?

[Anonymous No.14643524]

>>14643511
I have no idea what a turing test even is, but my 1 minute research leaves me guessing that you ironically pay attention to Twitter to stay informed. Am I right?

[Anonymous No.14643526]

>>14643511
>no, fucking up a sentence and making a repost is an easy thing to code into a bot.
I have no dog in this race but wtf are you talking about?

[Anonymous No.14643528]

>>14643524
the turing test is a test of whether or not you pass as a human, and you do not. your algorithm is failing to post an obvious answer and continually generating unrelated shill gibberish.

it’s really a simple question and the more this algorithm fails to tell me the answer about the sounds coming from the barn the more embarrassing it is for whoever developed it, since the algorithm is now totally crashing and burning and whoever made the last pull request should be fired since i’ve never seen such an obvious not on here before

[Anonymous No.14643532]

>>14643528
The better question here is what any of this bullshit has to do with you appealing to authority

[Anonymous No.14643535]

>>14643526
if i wanted to write a script to be a bot on 4chan, it would be a very simple thing to implement forming a normal response, and then find one word to substitute with a typo and then repost with a typo correction . you could write a simple python script to do this, wouldn’t even need to be trained into the network

[Anonymous No.14643545]

>>14643535
Oh, you have no idea what you're talking about and probably heard of "machine learning" last week. Gotcha

[Anonymous No.14643553]

for the record, here is the simple question the bot has been unable to answer for 35 minutes now
> i would like you to tell me the species and minimum quantity of animals required to hear “quack” and “neigh” coming from a single barn

seriously, massive turing test failure and clear evidence we have bots posting here

[Anonymous No.14643555]

>>14643321
People often forget the part of the scientific method where you have to disregard the evidence and continue holding your initial hypothesis. The level of scientific illiteracy is saddening.

[Anonymous No.14643558]

>>14643553
Suck a dick faggot

>>14643555
That, and the concept that universities and academics used to welcome controversial commentary, as long as it was actually relevant. That's essentially how we got here in the first place

[Anonymous No.14643559]

>>14643558
>still can’t answer the barn question

[Anonymous No.14643560]

>>14643559
What can I say? My programmers programmed me to not indulge your highly specific gay shit

[Anonymous No.14643563]

>>14643559
Practically every single modern forum is pushing the narratives you believe in with bots and """"Facebook fact checkers" yet here you are.. Accusing others of being bots..

Perhaps you've spent too much time on contrived subjects

[Anonymous No.14643565]

>>14643560
the algorithm’s programmers suck, like really need to be fired. whoever coded this clearly forgot to program good monitoring because it should be sending text messages to the admins like “CRITOCAL FAILURE: BOT IS MALFUNCTIONING, ON CALL PLEASE ALERT DEVOPS”

[Anonymous No.14643567]

>>14643565
Kinda funny how you curiosity ignored this anon in your response
>>14643563

[Anonymous No.14643569]

>>14643563
when i accused this bot anon of being a bot, his response was to call ME a bot.
>>14643469
he still is failing the basic turing test of a simple question
>>14643553

maybe he is just retarded to know what sounds animals make? i doubt it though because to be able to shill against science while not knowing what sounds farm animals make is a little suspect

[Anonymous No.14643577]

>>14643563
>>14643569
>Still ignoring me

[Anonymous No.14643580]

>>14643475
erm, this is actually quite an interesting question. The short answer is yes, but it’s a bit more complicated than you might think.

Firstly, what are these noises that we’re talking about? In order for the experiment to work, we need a male duck and a female duck that are genetically similar enough so they produce offspring. Once we’ve got two ducks that fit into that category, then we can get them to mate.

Once we’ve mated the ducks, we want to ensure they both have healthy offspring. This means we need to keep the male ducks away from their females while they’re mating. We also need to make sure that the two males don’t get along too well with each other because if one male tries to mate with the female, the other will try to do the same.

[Anonymous No.14643582]

>>14643569
How about you address the fact that you confide in Twitter bots and Facebook fact checkers?

[Anonymous No.14643588]

>>14643582
how about your post sounds like a default bot reply so how about you answer the question about farm animal sounds coming from a barn to prove you’re a human first? like i’ve asked probably 10 times now and your algorithm still can’t even though an anon already gave you a hint?

[Anonymous No.14643589]

>>14643588
>Me parroting Twitter bots is something a bot would point out
Kek

[Anonymous No.14643596]

>>14643589
Beep boop