I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE!

submitted by [deleted] from i.imgur.com

all 50 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 10 insightful - 12 fun10 insightful - 11 fun11 insightful - 12 fun -  (1 child)

The soyience is settled!

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs-gocza6t8

[–]Airbus320 5 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 5 fun -  (18 children)

u/fedinetizen is the right one

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (17 children)

Don't chase Fed off.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (12 children)

Why not?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

He reminds me of myself in my early 20s.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I know he's annoying sometimes but he's evolving. One day he'll be like me if he's particularly unlucky. I see it.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

I like him. He's antagonistic, sure, but he's a smart kid.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (7 children)

So you think he can be turned to the light side?

He has some big brainwashing hurdles to overcome.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

I don't think we should try, let him be as he is. He can keep us honest.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

I'd personally like for him to leave on his own accord, but I would be bothered if he were banned or something (unless he clearly broke the rules on multiple occasions and had no remorse)

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

It'd be boring here if we all agreed all the time.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

I come here to learn, not to agree, and certainly not to waste time debating ignoramuses and asstrolls.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I have to admit, when you two fight it does amuse me.

[–]Velocity 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Smart enough to know better, but not smart enough to deprogram himself. He's disappointingly a verbose line item Snopes tier rebuttal of absolutely everything that goes outside of the lines of an Msm narrative. Maybe the military conditioning is to blame. Maybe he really is just a shill.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Airbus only knows insults.

[–]Airbus320 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

No I know calc 3 too

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

touché

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Airbus does talk some shit lol. I still like him and you too socks.

[–]JasonCarswell 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

SCIENTISM: A blind faith dogma in the benevolence of corporations making obscene profits from their allegedly safe but very secret and privatized so-called "science".

Authentic science is a transparent discovery and open verification process (not settled) of elimination based on a hypothesis. Since many factors may corrupt this process it must be openly verifiable to eliminate junk science from legitimate results.

[–]RatherSmallPotato 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

But any time a lefty questions the "settled" gender science suddenly THAT'S settled science. Not a lefty and think the gender ideology is nuts, but, there's something truth to what I'm saying.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think I agree but your wording is confusing.

[–]UndefinedParadigm1 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Genius

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (14 children)

At this point we need to De-science because it's pretty clear that all science leads to the mass consumption of resources and destruction of the planet. Of course that's never going to happen, so what do you do? Well you go on Ebay of course and find something cool to buy. Because if you can't beat em...

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

time to unironically bring back ludditism

[–]magnora7 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

Can we be similar to the Amish and stop using technology invented after the year 2006 (instead of 1890 like the actual Amish)

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

I'd vote for that!

Why 2006? I had some smart phones 2003-2010.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

Perhaps because 2006 was before the crash and before windows 10 lol

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

2007 was my best year. I was an early adopter back then.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

I can remember when you could manage an operating system with a bat file and a config.sys file. Then windows 95 came out, full of bugs of course, and with a massive registry that no one could fathom. It bothered many of us, Duke Nukem ran too fast for one, but then 95-SE was released and I discovered the EF2000 flight sim and lost a year fighting WWIII over Norway. Ahhhh, those were the days! Still have a Thrustmaster flight stick throttle combo somewhere...

This was it! Still for sale. https://tinyurl.com/y9xnl77l

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Intense joystick.

I still have all my Commodore 64 stuff except the monitor (was my best TV hooked up to some VCRs).

[–]RatherSmallPotato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I met a chick that wants to move offgrid with me into a 20 square metre cabin. We're gonna fuck a lot.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (4 children)

Well you go on Ebay of course and find something cool to buy

Hell yeah! I like buying shit. I know it's shitty commercialism, but it's also way cheaper than therapy.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

lol, yes it's a genetic trait isn't it, be it filling a hut with seashells or a home with digital toys. I love Ebay, but I love the local thrift shops just as much. One thing I avoid though is the big, and small, businesses that sell at huge markups to cover their staffing and rents. And doctors! Fuck all thieving doctors and their unnecessary toxic drugs and procedures.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

There's only four downsides to thrift stores.

  1. You can never find more of the thing you like.
  2. Sometimes they smell funny.
  3. It takes time to dig through the shit to find the gold.
  4. There is a lesser-known thrift store monopoly scamming and spanning North America, and it controls all the major thrift chains, tied in with the Salvation Army, Goodwill, etc.

IMO, there should be a community flea market every other block. Go Greens! Reuse, refill, recycle, upcycle, freecycle, resist, etc.

[–]madcow-5 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Thrift stores work well in cities IMO. Rural and suburban areas, they're filled with weird stuff no one would wear except a hipster desperate for attention. But my last city had a nice one I could find decent normal clothes for cheap in it.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

It's been a dozen year since I was a hipster/bohemian. Now I wear normal clothes because I'm poor and can't fit in my nifty things. I have no longer have any idea what the latest trends are, from city to city or in extreme places like clubs or Burning Man.

Regardless of some of the stupid fashions (in the eye of the beholder), I would actually prefer to see more unconventional clothing than "normal" shit. If people felt free to be different I'd suspect we wouldn't have so much bullshit conformity. Sure it might be harsh on they eyes, but it would also be better for our souls. It certainly couldn't be worse that the fat kids in skinny jeans with lame coloured hair and face piercings.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

/s/ConsumeProduct

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

The right-wing propaganda machine can do much better than this, unless it's for the single-digit IQ voter.

(For example, a so-called 'science worshiper' would like the scientific method, and would regularly consider it. There are however corporate-funded "research" projects that are only concerned with finding data that agrees with the model, and throwing out the data that does not agree with the model. Dupont is famous for this. But this is not 'science worship' in the least. It's simply an abuse of the research and tests. And consider who the 'experts' are. 99.9% of scientists are not paid shills. There are shills who use their university affiliations to push corporate agendas, and they are argulably in the .001%, and are too few to matter. Moreover, what's with the 4chan meme? Got to indoctrinate all of the edgelords?)

[–]BigFatRetard 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

I think science worship is a good choice of words, because it isn't actually being a practicioner of science.

Everyone will always twist whatever the greatest power is to get what they want. When I worked at a union facility, every loudmouth had reasons why the union wanted them to get their way. When I worked at a facility with a strong safety culture, every loudmouth had reasons why safety wanted them to get their way. When I worked at a facility with a real ball buster at the top, every loudmouth had reasons why said ball buster wanted them to get their way. In broader society, when religion was powerful, people used religion to silence the people they didn't like. Now that social justice is powerful, you can find articles from psychpaths explaining why virtually everything on the planet is against social justice and needs to be ended.

This is just more of the same. Science isn't being used as a tool to seek truth, it's being used as a bludgeon to force people to comply. Having the wrong (true) data is a great way to get cancelled. Having the wrong (facially correct) conclusions is a great way to get cancelled. If these people were around in the days of phlogestin theory, they'd be attacking people talking about oxidation because their political arguments would rely on phlogestin theory. These are the exact same people who arrested Galileo and charged him with heresy.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I agree with almost all of this, especially if we're addressing the politicization of science, or also the control by the Church in Galileo's day. But in this cause the problem is politics, as well as religion in politics, rather than the worship of science. Regarding phlogiston, chemists wanted scientific evidence, based on precision assessments and observations. Lavoisier had to be able to demonstrate in a precision manner (sometimes by having special equipment made for the job) that - because certain elements gained weight after combustion, phlogiston could not have existed because it would have had a negative weight in the same process. The fact that other chemists required him to be more precise in his approaches to the experiments is informative of the rigour of science at the time. Lavoisier's position of authority at the French Academy was not sufficient for him to gain immediate acceptance of his inti-phlogiston experiments and papers. Skepticism about his intial results helped found modern chemistry, because Lavoisier developed more precise scientific approaches to his "oxygen" experiments.

[–]BigFatRetard 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

You're right, it's more a metaphorical worship, in the sense that certain people treat it like a religion that cannot be questioned, not in the sense of actually worshipping the actual thing that science actually is.

An actual worshipper of science would always have to be open to being proven wrong, which would not benefit the political or religious folks who need science to agree with them.

[–]JasonCarswell 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

" An actual worshipper of science would always have to be open to being proven wrong "

[–]madcow-5 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

That line stuck out to me as well. If you understand what science is and appreciate its use, you don't "worship" it. As far as having trust, or "faith", in it goes, that only goes as far as your faith in the integrity of the scientific community at the moment. Certain fields, like social sciences right now, the peer review process has become a joke. Then in others, you have different hands pulling in different directions for a million and one different reasons. On top of that, you have all sorts of studies and data that gets censored on social media platforms.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, "utilize" is superior to "worship".

However, I would argue that the scientific method (aka "science") does not depend on integrity, but rather, it depends upon openness and verification.

With that openness and verification the "scientific community" may earn integrity or discredit themselves - independently of the method. Some are jokes, some are corrupt, and some censor, and that's on them - but science remains the best method we have. It doesn't cover everything, but it's pretty damn good.

Here's a frightening thought:
If they're waging a war on science now, will they be waging a war on FLOSS tomorrow? The giant corporations have already been buying themselves into "open source" communities and such.

[–]DisgustResponse 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Science is fake and gay. Nothing of importance has ever come about because it first appeared in some limp-dick scientific journal.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Please teach me your wisdom.

[–]Cappon 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

●▬▬▬▬PART TIME JOBS▬▬▬▬▬●I make $100h while I'm traveling the world. Last week I worked by my laptop in Rome, Monti Carlo and finally Paris…This week I'm back in the USA. All I do are easy tasks from this one cool site. check it out, Copy AND PASTE IN URL FOR MORE DETAIL══════►► https://rb.gy/wqwd5b