(((Science)))

Has "Science" become the new dogma of globalists?

In generations past, those in leadership could just claim heresy by pointing to religious text and using it to justify their claims.

Now there are "scientists" doing "studies" that have no clear empirical evidence and they're presenting their "findings" as objective truth, rather than subjective gleanings from unclear data sets.

>Daily reminder non-peer reviewed "science" is as useful as a bag of microwaved catshit, it's only good for annoying people

Every dumb uneducated cunt that shouts, "LOL SCIENCE" generally has no fucking idea what scientific theory even is.

Other urls found in this thread:

imdb.com/title/tt2401256/board/thread/260001934
youtube.com/watch?v=vdfRAP-plNc
nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses/
youtube.com/watch?v=47yJJrauc9c
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis
thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=scientific_method
thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=youre_not_a_nerd
twitter.com/AnonBabble

It's not that Republicans are against science. We just are smart enough to see through the bullshit when they use it to push their global agenda. Just like global warming. We're all for protecting the environment but they add in other shit that helps push their globalist agenda and we shoot it down then they say we hate the environment

Bill Nye/Neil DeGrasse Tyson pseudoscience has

this

No, no please, don't let Bill Nye be a fucking lefty, why is everybody loved a fucking lefty shit

Cuz the Jews run Hollywood

Nice dubs though

Well no because if they believed all scientific evidence then their whole race and gender equality thing would fall flat on its face.

this is campbell's law at work: the more relevant an indicator becomes, the more subject it will be to corruption.

It would like be pitching my business to sell and someone asking me about the financials and I just reply

"ITS ACCOINTING, HOW CAN YOU DENY ACCOUNTING?

we don't challenge imperial evidence but we question the basis for the conclusions, validity of evidence, and the incentives of the people publishing the conclusions

it's pretty creepy when politicians say they "believe in science."

What its like being this unintelligent?

>Has "Science" become the new dogma of globalists?


No. But scientists, atleast in the US, have always been pretty mercenary in their attitude. "Whose bread I eat, his song I sing." Goes for both sides.

Also, don't believe for a second people like Nye or Tyson represent the average scientist. They're pop culture icons, and that's about it.

But pop culture icons can hold a lot of sway in a society that treats pop culture like a religion.

> libtards act like they are the ideologically superior when it comes to science
> libtards are scared of nuclear power plants
> libtards believe that a human isn't a human until it exits the womb, that biological gender doesn't equate to a organisms sex, and that extra body fat on people is totally normal and healthy
> libtards continually backpedal, move the goalposts, and commit the logical fallacy of non-falsification in regards to climate change
> libtards deny genetic differences between people of different races and genders

The ideology of progress and science, everyone.

He's Obama's bitch actually. How haven't you noticed this before?
Get used to the idea of having few heroes.

Michio Kaku is a dumb retarded shill. Much worse than Bill Die The Russian Spy.

class atc

You tell us, dumbass. Reading comprehension must not be your strong suit, so why don't you say what you think it means?

I really didn't want to get into this, but it's a problem of epistemology. Science provides us with evidence that supports a conclusion. This is NOT proof. The only way to prove something is using raw logic, such as a syllogism. A scientific experiment / study / whatever proves nothing. It only gives you evidence u can use to support a conclusion. Pic unrelated.

...

yes, too many (((MSM))) outlets misreporting studies that haven't even been peer reviewed.

They DO represent the average scientist though. Thats the problem. Its not a true representation but its still how moder scientists are portrayed.

The closest thing to a popular right-wing scientist is thunderfoot. Who I love btw.

>pseudoscience

Can you explain?

>only way to prove something is using raw logic, such as a syllogism.

This is completely false.

I think there's a difference between science and """""science"""""

Bill Nye and Black Science Guy are actors/journalists. Literally.

They push the religion of Science onto the younger generations.

Bet so many people liked the cosmos show and its CGI created universe.

Illusionists.

Op likes penises in his butt and mouth and it is obvious

>Bill Nye and Black Science Guy are actors/journalists. Literally.

They both literally work in engineering and modern science fields as well as being famous.

The vostek ice core samples disproved global warming as it showed increased co2 is the result of increased temperature, not vice versa. Climate change is just a tool to implement a carbon tax.

anthropogenic pollution altering our climate is a well documented and understood phenomena user.

Science is the religion of the 21st century.

People like bill nye the mechanical engineer guy can associate themselves with (((science))) and "intellectuals" will listen to his opinion as though it was scientific fact.

And they get paid to shill. Your point?

What are they shilling?

>God isn't real
>universe is infinitely big
>we are billions of years old
>black holes (black suns) are the most powerful force and the center of our galaxy
>we've evolved from inferior lifeforms
>gravity exists even though they cant explain what it is or measure it
>your government and government backed institutions are correct on everything they claim including science

The new series "The Night of" is interesting in this. You might think it would be filled with themes of a corrupt legal system, or similar, but so far what I am finding is that it is laced with anti science themes throughout.

imdb.com/title/tt2401256/board/thread/260001934

>God isn't real

Neither of them say this.

>universe is infinitely big

Neither of them say this.

>we are billions of years old

elaborate, i don't remember either of them saying this, but i don't know what you mean.

>black holes (black suns) are the most powerful force and the center of our galaxy

It's a well received theory that neither Tyson or mr. Nye invented.

>we've evolved from inferior lifeforms

Evolution was not invented by Tyson or mr. Nye.

>gravity exists even though they cant explain what it is or measure it

We can measure it, gravity waves, it's not important though, science is about learning, not about just throwing out things we don't immediately understand. It doesn't exist just to offend you.

>your government and government backed institutions are correct on everything they claim including science

Neither of them claim this.

They have a lot of influence yes, but that doesn't necessarily means something bad happens when they use it to propagandize science in a bid to increase its popularity.

Other than a lot of disappointed STEM students who figure out science isn't goofy mythbuster shit but rather anything from quadratic equations up to differential geometry.

A way more pressing issue is simple statistical fraud among "scientists" outside of STEM.

It's sad to confirmation bias and "these results didn't work try again" run amok

t. pubs in New Phytologist

Yes, yes it has.

Science is for fools and worker bees,
go pure math and insane in 13 years or go home

You never watched the cosmos then. Black science guy defends all those claims.

Bill hates creationism.

> Doesn't understand the scientific method
this is why you post on Sup Forums instead of /sci/, you pseudo intellectual faggot.

All the scientists got together and voted to say Climate Change is real since Voting and Consensus is the new Science and Math it must be true.

No, no he didn't say those things, you just clearly didn't understand him. Feel free to quote.

Bill hates creationism, sure, creationism is not taught at most public education and higher education entities for a reason. You can dislike that stance all you want, evolution can answer questions, creationism does not and it is not taught outside of the home.

youtube.com/watch?v=vdfRAP-plNc

First off, that fucking idiot, Bill Nye, IS NOT a scientist.

Then why add in all the bullshit surrounding it?

I work in semiconductors and if I had a record similar to the climate "scientists" (who are less predictive than the various bond market crystal ball wizards in the business press) I would kill myself when faced with such shameful display.

"Science is settled". It's so settled that even the GIEC flip flops on their conclusions every new report, and 90% of their predictions that should already have happened are way out of tolerance range.

I recommend you the reading of the reports of the GIEC from the 80s/90s (whose main predictions were supposed to happen before 2016). Those are funny reads. Literally the Apocalypse every six months beginning in 2005 until the heat death of the universe in 2014 due to the big bad CO2. I'm barely exaggerating.

Climate "science" is the mainstream equivalent of the "ITS HABBENING XD" threads on Sup Forums.

He went to Cornell university and works in engineering. He has done a lot more science than most scientists.

Yeah basically all atheists:
>haha you believe a book written by the creator about our world!
>You should believe THIS book written by a scientist. No I've never seen the evidence myself only read about it but he has Ph. D xDD
Atheists are the biggest retards on earth

>Then why add in all the bullshit surrounding it?

I'm sorry?

>I work in semiconductors and if I had a record similar to the climate "scientists" (who are less predictive than the various bond market crystal ball wizards in the business press) I would kill myself when faced with such shameful display.

You clearly don't understand anthropogenic pollution or how we understand it to say this. I really don't even know what you're talking about.

>"Science is settled". It's so settled that even the GIEC flip flops on their conclusions every new report, and 90% of their predictions that should already have happened are way out of tolerance range.

examples and sources?

>I recommend you the reading of the reports of the GIEC from the 80s/90s (whose main predictions were supposed to happen before 2016). Those are funny reads. Literally the Apocalypse every six months beginning in 2005 until the heat death of the universe in 2014 due to the big bad CO2. I'm barely exaggerating.

Update yourself and read more modern theories and don't get hung up on what a scientist said 20 years ago thinking that disproves everything.

>Climate "science" is the mainstream equivalent of the "ITS HABBENING XD" threads on Sup Forums.

Environmentalism is an entire field of study and it wasn't invented just to be annoying. It exists because it's a very pressing modern concern especially moving forward.

Yes, he did

It's perfectly understandable.

Yes, the current scientific religion is pushed through indoctrination in our education systems, like many things.

Question it and you look like a fool, even though most of their claims rely on theory.

God has all the answers. They make perfect sense

>This is completely false.
On what grounds?

>Yes, he did

quote him.

>It's perfectly understandable.

It is, just not by you apparently.


>Yes, the current scientific religion is pushed through indoctrination in our education systems, like many things.

Try learning about evolution before you bash the entire world for it.


>Question it and you look like a fool, even though most of their claims rely on theory.

Most people don't question it user. It's foolish because it's a very well established and well understood phenomena. If you believe it's any other way well....prove it.

>God has all the answers. They make perfect sense

For you maybe, but it's patently not true on the whole.

proofs only exist in mathematics.

Watch any episode of the cosmos, hes the narrator

Evolution cant be proven. Darwin took back many of his theories before he died.

Funny how you speak for the entire world. The world that only until the last century believed in God for thousands of years due to the religion of science, religion of theory.

Most people dont question it because its been indoctrinated into them since they were children.

The bible is the most complex piece of literature and accurate on human nature ever written. But apparently you know better because your science books with made up numbers and equations and pictures told you so

Bill Nye has bachelor degree in engineering, and often flat out lies about science related to political topics. One example would be the consensus among climate scientists, there is no consensus on whether global warming is cause by humans. There is however a consensus on humans affecting the climate on a global scale, which we do. The chinese slowed down the Earths rotation slighly when they built the Three Gorges Dam.

Tyson was an actual scientist doing astronomy research, and alrgly sticks to that field. He is fine as far as I know.

evolution is not science.

>You clearly don't understand anthropogenic pollution or how we understand it to say this. I really don't even know what you're talking about.
Besides the typical tone of superiority, you should see your reading coprehension. I never pretended to know the field from the inside. I just look at the results and they are awful. I don't need to know much about medical diagnosis to know that Theranos was a scam for instance. I have only a very rough idea of the inner working of the cars made today, yet I am able to distinguish them and their performances.

>Update yourself and read more modern theories and don't get hung up on what a scientist said 20 years ago thinking that disproves everything.
I'm reading the reports from 20 years ago because those are the ones that have predictions coming before 2016 (today) and we can compare it to reality.
The comparison isn't flattering.

>examples and sources?
Antarctic ice mass rising contrary to "predictions", surpassing the mild loss in arctic ice mass (itself below prediction). That's an example I remember from reading more into it a few months ago. First link that comes in a search, but I don't need to feed such an expert on climate as you this data that you already know: nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses/

>Environmentalism is an entire field of study and it wasn't invented just to be annoying. It exists because it's a very pressing modern concern especially moving forward.
And climategate didn't happen. Thank you for correcting the record.

For tautologies yes. Math is just logic with numbers.

So what you're saying is that proof only exists in logic, whereas earlier you said that "the only way to prove something is using raw logic" is false.

Contradiction.

>Watch any episode of the cosmos, hes the narrator

I asked you to quote him. You didn't...oh well.

>Evolution cant be proven. Darwin took back many of his theories before he died.

Depends on what you personally need proven. We don't have proof ( i think) of a species diverting from another species, but there is plenty of proof beyond argumentation evidence.

>Funny how you speak for the entire world. The world that only until the last century believed in God for thousands of years due to the religion of science, religion of theory.

Yea and before that we thought the world was flat too. (the Greeks didn't but i think the point i made is crystal)

>Most people dont question it because its been indoctrinated into them since they were children.

sounds like you have a conspiracy theory.

>The bible is the most complex piece of literature and accurate on human nature ever written. But apparently you know better because your science books with made up numbers and equations and pictures told you so

Anything translated from ancient hebrew is bound to be complex. The problem isn't what you believe user, it's that you believe your beliefs can impact me.

We're done, take care. :)

>evolution is not science.

elaborate.

Interesting, i generally like Nye, but i believe he is allowed to make mistakes, i will research this further. Thanks.

There's nothing wrong with science; in and of itself it's neutral.

It's the Left's picking and choosing, cafeteria-style co-opting of it that's the problem. They act like they have a monopoly on the truth and that's just their fucked up psychology. Don't fall for it.

>Besides the typical tone of superiority, you should see your reading coprehension. I never pretended to know the field from the inside. I just look at the results and they are awful. I don't need to know much about medical diagnosis to know that Theranos was a scam for instance. I have only a very rough idea of the inner working of the cars made today, yet I am able to distinguish them and their performances.

What fanatical raving.

>I'm reading the reports from 20 years ago because those are the ones that have predictions coming before 2016 (today) and we can compare it to reality.
The comparison isn't flattering.

Using 80's science to disprove modern state of the art science is psuedo intellectual parroting.

>Antarctic ice mass rising contrary to "predictions"

We're done user. You're a psuedo intellectual. This basically confirmed it, and I'm sure you won't understand why and I'm okay with that.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Maybe one day you'll see the light, but for now live in the darkness you've been manipulated to believe in.

Don't question science, don't question your government. Shhhh

Stay asleep

Not him but I have heard several people around me say the same thing coming from a Karl Popper perspective. Evolution is actually perfectly fitting what Popper considered pseudo-science: irrefutable by design, will always come up with a convoluted yet generic answer to everything (the "adaptation": those that survive are those that are adapted but the only criterium for adaptation is that the adapted animals are those that survived), reliance on "chance" (not probability but luck or what the Greek called tyche), insistence on confirmation and on interpretation of data instead of attempt at refutation (and the few courageous people trying to refute it are answered with some more adaptation memes).

Gloabl Warming aside, the oceans are getting more acidic as a result of Co2 being absorbed.

Before memetic responses like I should perhaps add that I don't buy Popper theories myself, but I have heard several people make this argument.

The first person to redpill me on this was Richard Dawkins. I was reading one of his dumb books, where he made the mistake of quoting Charles Darwin way too much and in comparison made himself look like an asshole. He really is just feel good fluff for euphoric echochambers, and an actually important scientist made him look that much worse.

Math doesn't exist in the real world user. It's a construct to make predictions, proofs do not exist in reality.

...

Hmmm. Until something better comes along that can make predictions ill continue with evolution, and seeing how evolution is taught in science classrooms ill continue to consider a science. When a better theory comes along, i will move to that, i have no bias towards evolution or creationism, one just works and the other does not. It's that simple.

> imperial evidence

It's funny. When you're growing up, they tell you that your dreams and ambitions will change. They tell you that the world will change, that people will change, your body will change. They never tell you that your heroes will change as well.

>Don't question science, don't question your government. Shhhh

But that's exactly what you want people to do with religion. So why is it ok in that case?

>It's in a scientific study, it must be true
>You can't argue with statistics

People that say either of these need to be euthanized.

...

Bill Nye is an infuriating prick.
A real nasty piece of work.

Stefan Molyneux got a lot of videos about corruption and propaganda in science and education. How the science community censor inconvinient truths for the left, and how even the peer review system is corrupt. Can't tell which video exatly, but most on topic videos worth listening to, especialy the ones with experts about racial differences.

Nobody disagrees that science isn't corrupt. But as a system it is the best we have to learning about the world around us, and there are both good and bad practitioners, certainly not all of science is good, one look at medicinal research will display this abundantly.

I don't have a problem with science, I have a problem with the left that abuse it, and the retards that don't question it.

Sad is the world that needs heroes

>science teaches you to doubt and question before anything else
>hurr durr indoctrination
>American education

yeah i can
youtube.com/watch?v=47yJJrauc9c

I loved that show and it was meant for children, which will absolutely contain pseudo science.

>science teaches you to doubt and question before anything else
This is what people say in the abstract, but give a specific example and people will treat you like a retard if you not only question but even simply don't follow the accepted consensus.

See the life of Semmelweis
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis
Warning: extreme feels inside. This is what happens when you actually question the "settled science". One of the top five physicians ever, the man that launched hygienism which is the cause of more extension of life expectancy than all new chemicals combined, died being beaten by guards in a insane asylum he was placed in by "progressive minded" "educated" scholars from distinguished universities and the positivist school because he had committed the high crime of saying people should wash their hands in hospitals.

This is what happens to dissenters. Today people would be more reluctant to confined people to asylum, but they would bury you all right.

We should push to rename him to Bill Nye the social science guy

Do you actually have any reading comprehension or do you just enjoy contradicting yourself?

>80's science
2016-20=1996

>it's a Sup Forums refutes gravity episode

Heating up a bag of popcorn now, these are my favorite.

I swear I've read this before...

Ahh yes!
thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=scientific_method
And
thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=youre_not_a_nerd

I love Maddox too, OP.

>it's a shitposting faggot has no reading comprehension reply

How many proxies are you behind you fucking leaf?

Fuck that Armenian cuck

Lmao same, this is the one think Sup Forums's majority does that's fucking retarded.

No, but pop science "representatives" have.

ie neoliberal technocrats who just love pretending the culture class and liberal wing of elites are scientifically correct and everyone who isn't with them are hick bigots who think the world is 6000 years old and kill trannies daily.

>I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE!

kek is realer than the Jewish goy god faggot

Globalism and if the agenda includes scientific understanding for masses - have nothing wrong in its structure.

One global family means no wars and focused attention on important matters.