What the fuck happened to bill?

What the fuck happened to bill?

Other urls found in this thread:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3737365/
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1416706/DNA-survey-finds-all-humans-are-99.9pc-the-same.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

fuck off kike

They knew he could sway others, so they turned him. Farewell, the Bill Nye I knew and loved.

He was infected by the leftist mental illness

((They)) got to him

He used to be a man of science and learning and now he makes dubstep songs about anal sex

What happened to you?

This. Feels genuinely bad. It's like losing Carl Sagan again.

But what he has said is right

In which way is he wrong?

Mate if you really think you are the exact same (apart from skin colour) as someone with over 10,000 years of separation you are an absolute idiot.

Proof?

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3737365/

>There are no objective criteria for choosing one adaptive trait over another to define race. As a consequence, adaptive traits do not define races in humans.
>Much of the recent scientific literature on human evolution portrays human populations as separate branches on an evolutionary tree. A tree-like structure among humans has been falsified whenever tested, so this practice is scientifically indefensible.
>Humans have much genetic diversity, but the vast majority of this diversity reflects individual uniqueness and not race.

He choose meme science over real science.

Well he understands science.

To the anti-science right wing, that's a problem.

Say what you will about the message, but it's a damn fact that that image is designed to be authoritative. An old man sternly looking directly at you in a dark room, with an all capital block of text telling you what your new philosophy is, is authoritative. This is his move, 'tell people what to think, in forceful terms'. And the thing is that race not existing is simply not literally true. This is authoritarian futurist rhetoric.
I mean race does exist, there actually are black people and white people and etc, but his eagerness to create a post-modern world has him callously denying the human condition and our place in history, as if it were an argument. He's acting like some transhumanist or something, like he really can't parse how limited people can be as a member of this species. Is this image really all that helpful? Does anyone change their mind based on Bill Nye's new career? Or is this merely something to be passed around in solidarity on social media? I feel like Bill Nye used to care about education, but now he feels he's got the world settled and he'll be damned if those nasty humans have politics that don't align with his vision. I mean I get it, but shouldn't there be an olive branch here? He's sincerely acting like he doesn't understand, and keeps pulling this futurist mental gymnastic whenever the subject comes up. He's lost his personality because almost every word out of his mouth now is some sideways implication against the human condition that we live with. He can hardly converse anymore. He's just constantly. pressing. this. issue. As if all you need to do is speak like you live in the future and suddenly everything will change.

>EVIDENCE OF COMMON SENSE
EVIDENCE OF COMMON SENSE
>EVIDENCE OF COMMON SENSE
EVIDENCE OF COMMON SENSE
>EVIDENCE OF COMMON SENSE
EVIDENCE OF COMMON SENSE
>EVIDENCE OF COMMON SENSE
EVIDENCE OF COMMON SENSE

...

He prefers to cater fake science to the snowflakes on the left who hate science.

no 'objective' criteria for selecting adaptive traits is not the same thing as saying "race doesn't exist"

This is the best altright bait.

...

>leftists
>hating science

Are you ok? The only reason you study evolution is because of the leftists breaking free from backwards conservative thinking.

>leftists
>liking science
You mean how believing you are helicopter makes you one? The left hates science if not more than the right.

>there is no such thing as a race lmao
>despite plenty of empirically proven differences between people with different colors of skin like sickle-cell anemia in blacks
>also even though there is no such thing as race, let me spend my entire spiel crying about how whites (who don't exist) are evil and blacks (who don't exist because we're all the same xxddd) are oppressed and din do nuffin

it's just classic semantics faggotry that all political shitbirds like to pull, they very much believe in "race" because they spend all their time talking about it. the fact that (they think) there is no is biological definition of race is irrelevant because as a social construct it is very, very real to everyone. (and also they're wrong because niggers are literally proven inferior by actual science.)

thanks

SHILL NYE THE BIASED GUY

Your opinion is invalid while confronted with an actual study though

>We are all of the same stardust, so we are the same person
See Bill, that doesn't explain why people have seperate identities. Saying we should act without individual identity because we're all merely particles is scientific fundamentalism. It's willfully callous to things like understanding and self-knowledge, and totally blind to the observable realities of the human condition, that we have all been living with since the dawn of time. The shit he's saying is not how it is.

The article says that all the information about race is false because there isnt "objective" criteria. If you want to show the contrary, then onus probandi.

telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1416706/DNA-survey-finds-all-humans-are-99.9pc-the-same.html

I guess now all studies are 'settled science', then? What criteria did they test for this diversity under? The clearly acknowledge genetic diversity exists, and that cultures come into being when separated, and then they turn around and say 'but actually those don't mean anything and drawing humanity as anything but one line going one direction is scientifically wrong'.
I understand their point, it's just that's its a social and philosophical plan, not a scientific discovery.

>Tries to defend that race exist because the african population has a greater proportion of sicke-cell anemia
>Despite the fact drepanocitosis is produced by the change of ONLY one nucleotide

What an ignorant

Here's an objective criteria. Children take on the skin color of their parents. You can compare and contrast the hue of people's skin, and you will notice a difference. People simply aren't literally identical and only 'just the same space dust'. That's scientific fundamentalism and is willfully ignorant to the existence of identity. If they're so scientific then they should have the awareness to observe the effects of space dust coming together to create a person, and how identity emerges from that.
See the thing is Bill and people like this are trying to shed away anything that leads to racism, they're trying to reform science to not acknowledge anything that would cause conflict between people. It's almost a noble goal, but they're being dishonest about what they're doing, acting like they discovered some new material out of a meteorite that proves something real, rather than admitting they're trying to change the philosophy of science. And when they sit there and say things that are literally not true, such as denying that anything subjective has any social reality, and that there continuously tested and observed differences between people aren't there because it would be rude to say so and doesn't get us into space fast enough.

Onus probandi

I'm sorry, do differences not count if they're caused by small things? Do I get to tell the police that crashing my car into someone's home 'doesn't exist' because it was merely caused by one tiny deviant nucleotide? Did World War I not 'exist' just because it was simply sparked by one small political assassination? I didn't realize that all a man is begins and ends with his genes. All I keep hearing from these people who trying to assert the objectivity of scientism is how much they don't understand why people have problems with eachother. In their model none of our conflicts exist. Except our conflicts do exist, so isn't it a poor model?

Was Alabama Governer George Wallace standing in the doorway to the University of Alabama campus to block black people from attending 'not about race'? And if it isn't, then how is disavowing the term 'race' a solution to anyone's problems? Repeating in aggressive terms that race isn't real merely exposes that the issues are much bigger than race. Bill Nye is almost admitting people are justified in their conflicts because it's not racism. Maybe he isn't a futurist, maybe he's actually admitting people are in conflict because they sincerely have conflicting cultures, but he won't say that. He just keeps saying we're stardust and we should behave as if we were particles.
Honestly Bill Nye is about this close to admitting people who have been called 'racist' aren't racist at all, and that there are real more important problems they're responding to. I don't read that angle out of what he's saying. He just thinks race isn't real, so you ought to vote democrat.

Both are speaking about political nonsense I don´t give a fuck.

The only thing that cares is the scientific knowledge based on scientific method and with that method we have obtained evidence that we can´t apply the concept of race (like we use in other animals) in the homo sapiens.

We can´t use skin color to define race and in the article is explained why. We can´t variations in only one nucleotide (sickle cell anemia) that besides are explained by the presence of malaria to define race and that is explained by basic biology.

If you want to talk about a topic you have to learn something about it first. Like you want to talk about political/sociological things I don´t give a fuck and therefore I don´t argue.

Do you want to talk about the conflicts between different ethnicities? Fine by me but don´t try to use the science to argue when it says the contrary. Because then you look like the "leftist groups" that you criticize.

Genetics say races doesn´t exist in homo sapiens (ethnicities could). Physics say we are all stardust. You can´t say other thing. You can only refute the conclusions derived from the first statements.