Dumbfound a liberal with 10 simple words:

What do you believe in?

What would you die for?

Attached: diuhuiewdiihwehiudiuqw.jpg (640x480, 45K)

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html
youtube.com/watch?v=bLcHZXsCbY4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>What do you believe in?
Diversity

>What would you die for?
Jamal

Dumbfound a conservative with 10 simple words:
Sorry, no fucking little boys in the locker rooms, thanks.

dumbfounded by your absolute stupidity, commie.

Have a bath

Stop white supremacy, join our Black Students' Collective - [email protected]

I believe that Trump knows bestest
For Israel of course :)

Truth.
Free speech.

liberal here.
1. Science
2. Anything I deem to be worth dying for. Exemple: I would most likely put my life on the line if it meant that it could save my "potential/future" children.

Attached: fundamental.jpg (496x419, 65K)

Blacks commit half of all violent crime (FBI stats).

Attached: 1484011752588s.jpg (250x250, 5K)

Cry more bitch nigger.

Attached: babydaddies.jpg (490x500, 61K)

when people say science these days i just imagine them gawking at people like neil degrasse tyson saying shit like "did you know that we are all made of star dust?" and then passing the news along to all of their friends so they'll be seen as prolific science enthusiasts.

>What do you believe in?
No niggers
>What would you die for?
Plane tickets for niggers to go back to Africa

>Dumbfound a liberal with 10 simple words
I could piss one off with 14

Attached: 1517457867822.jpg (710x577, 84K)

Guilty

You don't "believe" in science like religion because that requires faith. Modern scientific knowledge is based on mathematical evidence and experimental observations while science is a process for figuring things out.

You've confirmed you're a liberal because only someone truly retarded and scientifically illiterate would say they "believe in science."

this.
when it fits the agenda science is great.
also read about scientism.

Rabid republican here....Actually seems like a pretty honest answer. I would respect u enough to at least step over u and not on u.

>believe in science
Oh boy.

Elaborate?

"believing" in something doesn't necessarily require faith you dumbass. There is no ambiguity in the term where I used it.

When I say I believe in Science I mean that in order for me to accept something as a reality or a fact I need an empirical reasoning behind it.

>What do you believe in?
Jews need to be killed
>What would you die for?
Killing all the niggers.

No when you say you believe in science you sound like a retarded pop-sci reading drone to someone who actually understands science.

liberal here.
I know the whole 1488 meme.
maybe it's something else? try

I believe you're a faggot but that doesn't mean I have faith.

As a person of faith, I sometimes find myself leaning towards "confirmation bias". Its an easy thing to do.

Here's some empirical reasoning for you

Attached: 1509340035143.gif (2970x2400, 851K)

You undermine your whole nation for those that hate you.

Attached: allmybitchesandmyniggaz.png (800x972, 983K)

>What do you believe in?

Communism

>What would you die for?

Communism

Criticizing my phrasing rather than my beliefs. How pathetic. I actually understand and study science.

... You know there's a bunch of really pants-on-head retarded scientific papers out there, right? It's not hard to find them either. I've seen some shit.
Believing in science requires a bit of faith that eventually the garbage will get debunked and that the correct things will actually float to the top. Try being a social scientist that doesn't believe that the implicit bias test actually does ANYTHING these days. There's very little research to suggest that it has any impact on outcomes, or even that an awareness of your own "implicit biases" based on the test's results will make you a better/more fair person... but the circlejerk just keeps getting louder as more and more people fail to repeat the findings they were advertised. I have "faith" that whole thing HAS to collapse at some point, but it's penetrating so deeply into the public consiousness that you look like a backwards nutjob for doubting the IAT cult.

Why did god put a g spot in my butt?

Attached: 1521755734799.gif (227x221, 967K)

>What do you believe in?
whatever dosen't kill you.....makes you

Attached: joker.png (602x375, 164K)

>Stop white supremacy,

>join our Black Students' Collective

its only racist when.....

Attached: jDiDAMd.png (2000x2245, 104K)

I think she was a physicist before she became a politician. Wonder what went wrong?

The science of "races" is so unimportant to most of the scientific community, we usually put this field of study under social and cultural research. I am more interested in things that actually affect us, like medicine, climate change, renewable energy, etc.

>pedophelia among elites is a partisan issue

kike detected

10 words

15 words

it was supposed to be 14 words you retards

Political science is not science. What science do you study?

I'm fairly skeptical of papers or articles that I read that reach crazy conclusions. Climate change is a big one, they extrapolate the data so hard and present only the worst case scenarios as "this will happen because of climate change." The reality is we don't have enough information to show that we're negatively affecting the environment. It seems that there is a big push to get people to accept science with no skepticism as fact and that's just not the way it was meant to be. You just have to employ critical thinking skills with anything and it seems that is less and less common.

>Equality

>Democracy

It's that simple you retard

You have an enlarged prostate you fucking degenerate spastic,.

Yeah but I can only count to 21.

natural science, still in college,
we study chem, physics, biology, calculus, waves, etc.

You're going to have to deal with social and cultural circlejerk "science" eventually. Honestly, I get more and more interested in it all the time.

So, you didn't bring this up, but when I looked at sex differences stuff, I discovered that the test makers put a LOT of effort into getting male and female scores to have the same mean. This is why there's been so many changes to the SAT and IQ tests over the years. By asking different questions, you can force a uniformity in score between different groups.
One thing I saw recently is that apparently having rich black parents is not a good predictor of having rich black kids. They fall into poverty with pretty amazing rates. It was a NYTimes "interactive feature" sometime last week. Didn't finish reading it or the sources behind it.

I'm a liberal, I don't believe in equality simply because I don't believe it's feasible without creating a communistic regime. Although... I do believe in equal opportunity. Exemple: if a kid is born poor but he is intelligent, he shouldn't have to get crippling debts in order to get in college, while the rich kid, who is also smart, could go to college carefree. If it was for me, the poor kid would receive a bursary that would permit him to study carefree, you would only receive that bursary if you truly deserved it.

The prompt says 10 illiterate non-canadian

God is real

look up the comment chain and stfu

>Leaf
>based take and those digits

I'm confused as to which way to go here.

I was writing based off thw thread prompt not you, Zheng He

why the fuck did you use merkel, why not Trudeau? missed out opportunity.

Clearly triggered as well if the best you can come up with is
>hurt sure not 14 words lol you want 14 words here 14 words:
Niggers like you personify everything that's wrong with the left, pettiness over actual issues

Attached: climton-private-email_thumb.jpg (693x317, 75K)

Attached: 161008001109-donald-trump-video-statement-full-169.jpg (1600x900, 253K)

lol I actually wish I was a nigger, so I could plow your mother while your father watched.

>NYTimes
nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-class-white-and-black-men.html
Found it.
>Extensive Data Shows Punishing
Reach of Racism for Black Boys
>By EMILY BADGER, CLAIRE CAIN MILLER, ADAM PEARCE and KEVIN QUEALY MARCH 19, 2018
>Black boys raised in America, even in the wealthiest families and living in some of the most well-to-do neighborhoods, still earn less in adulthood than white boys with similar backgrounds, according to a sweeping new study that traced the lives of millions of children.
>White boys who grow up rich are likely to remain that way. Black boys raised at the top, however, are more likely to become poor than to stay wealthy in their own adult households.

In the source pdf, it says
>Finding #7: The black-white gap is not immutable: black boys who move to better neighborhoods as children have significantly better outcomes.
Which goes against some points in
I was also checking out something from Amy Wax that was saying something about how racial differences between Americans were less bad in some ways back in the 60s because everyone was held to similar sexual standards of marrying for life without any infidelity. Her conclusion was basically "it's great to have freedom, but the people that are rich today have overwhelmingly stuck with those older ideals. And yes, those ideals are fairly conservative, white, upper class, "bourgeois" ideals." There was a heavily implied "Maybe black people that aren't doing so hot should be forced back into that" which was pretty off-putting, but maybe I'm just too liberal to want people to be kept safe from themselves. youtube.com/watch?v=bLcHZXsCbY4 She's also been under fire for that, and recently removed from teaching certain classes at her school for some comments she made with the same interviewer.

What are the Federalist Papers?
What is the Bill of Rights?

Attached: franco_.png (1378x940, 1.52M)

liberals think dying for something is stupid. They'd rather trick one of their pets into dying for them instead.

Believe in me...will die for me

>neo conservative
>conservative
pick one faggot

>9/10 words
Burger education at its finest

Attached: image.jpg (218x231, 15K)

Attached: moldylocks.jpg (479x720, 59K)

respectable desu

Tbh it doesnt matter if climate change is real or in terms of economics and politics, but the sudden government influenced change would kill the US economy. Its going to be inevitable though, that we switch to renewable energy, and it will be paraded by the private sector instead of the government.

Reagan never worked a day in his life anyway. He was a fucking actor.
Throw him in some shitty minimum wage factory job and he'll fall to his knees and start sobbing.

And this marks the end of are conversation. Great representation of (((liberals))) on full display. Too stupid, even for Sup Forums.

Attached: gook_image04.jpg (496x600, 170K)

I believe in an equal state and that work should go to the most qualified, rather than try pushing forced diversity with ahitty coworkers.

I will die for my family, blood or not. And also for my country.

Attached: FB_IMG_1521300251670.jpg (784x960, 119K)

>

Attached: rosie.jpg (485x340, 95K)

>Sorry, no fucking little boys in the locker rooms, thanks.

And guess who you are voting for.

Science is an ongoing process, a failure of a hypothesis can be as good as a success, it is the process of learning. Not believing in it. "Believing" in science is not actually science.

But what if everyone is circlejerking around a conclusion that isn't particularly well supported by the evidence. For example, there IS a wage gap, and there IS evidence of some level of discrimination, but the wage gap isn't as big or unexplained as people claim it is, and a much smaller portion of it is discrimination than we're being sold. Also, people make choices that lead to difference in wage outcomes, which we're also being sold as "discrimination".

Does believing that the correct conception of wage gaps will trickle down to the people in charge count as "having faith in science". At some point, it ends up mattering what the policymaker believes, rather than what is actually true. A certain amount of the scientific process is the dissemination of the information, and I would argue that a large segment of the population is not interested in what is true or scientifically accurate. They only care about the bits of information they can use to sell something. You could say they believe in power, not in science.