Could a scientist please explain these scientific issues to me?

Could a scientist please explain these scientific issues to me?

Other urls found in this thread:

sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2016/gender-lines-science-transgender-identity/]
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17522828
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Maybe e-mail the feminist glacier people about it.

Feelings an personal opinions now constitute as science user. Ofcourse you wouldn't know that if you were under the spell of /pol/ for so long.

>another movement co opted

>colonization
I agree, we should find the scientifically best way to colonize countries and planets.

They count as social sciences, which are only partially considered as fields of science right now. Economists and political scientists have managed to weather that storm and even exploit the fruits of it without actually having to believe in it. I mean, they couldn't stay legitimate if they didn't stay aware of global events, and actually knowing about the world and its interactions tends to keep people from Western radical ideologies like intersectional feminism and white nationalism.

Colonization is a problem thanks to the length of travel and the lacking technology to preserve human bodies that far away.

Not only that but our idea of what is on that planet is quite literally trough the looking glass. We might be horrendously wrong about the planet we're throwing lives at.

For the rest... well social sicence aren't REALLY science.

Is there a Social Scientist in the house???

This was a tactile error made by an organizer for a March for science.
Idenitarian politics need to go and people need to stay on topic.
It's a free association of people marching against the incompetent governments science denial and disregard for public safety and scientific research.
This tweet isn't the agenda you massive retard.
This was a meme March people need to be knocking down doors and participating in decentralized direct action like I am doing now.
The civil rights movement wasn't successful by idenitarian politics. We just have to talk about the issues, marching isn't as imporant as annoying your family at the dinner table, or occupying government land, or even better "someone else's" "private property" like golf courses or industrial farms

>This tweet isn't the agenda you massive retard.
is this tweet the agenda?

...

Normie privilege is why fucked up people suffer. Where do you get off setting the norm.

libtard """science""" strikes again :^)

You are inadvertently shilling for institutionalized climate change denial, the destruction of imporant research and devolpment and large scale disregard for the health of the planet.
Yes, the organizer is a retard. People aren't marching for the person in control of the Twitter account, they are marching against an affront to the existence of humanity. Reactionaries and idenitarians need to go

>You are inadvertently shilling for institutionalized climate change denial, the destruction of imporant research and devolpment and large scale disregard for the health of the planet.
no, you just projected that all onto me

people can be against a march hijacked by SJWs without being against what the march was supposed to be for

This is way to clever for a libtard to have thought up.

I mean, puns are 2 steps above anything ive ever seen them do.

You can't disinfranchize yourself from a just cause just because you don't like some of the other people that are doing it. Inaction is the same as consent in my eyes, if you have a problem with the sjws, excert your own creative influence on the institutions available to you and try to get them back on topic, but don't react by allowing the house to divide.

>You can't disinfranchize yourself from a just cause just because you don't like some of the other people that are doing it.
yes you can, this would only be a valid argument if this march was the only way to push for such a cause, which it obviously isn't

> if you have a problem with the sjws, excert your own creative influence on the institutions available to you and try to get them back on topic
i'm not responsible for trying to educate a bunch of brainwashed ideologues

These are all ethical issues. Falling under philosophy.

Science and materialism as epistemological foundation rejects the concept of meaning altogether. As such these ethical constraints cannot be considered fundamentally scientific issues as they are rooted in a nonempirical world view. To even begin an honest discussion of this would begin axiomatically which would in turn destroy the justification for the ethical constraints on which these issues are based.

In short science is not ethics. And Science is a poor basis for ethics and in no way leads to such dogmatism.

If anything science provides mostly support for the dissolution of ethics as it has no natural manifestation.

Your logic would attend the Nuremberg Rally because it was a showcase of the success of vegetarianism

They are ethical issues but they affect the scientific community.

I know some very smart females trans females and other weird ass fuckers who were turned off from stem because someone made them feel unwelcomed

>people can be against a march hijacked by SJWs without being against what the march was supposed to be for
this

>argument isn't relevant
>not responsible
I beg to differ, here is a prime opportunity to support a just cause and rally others to do so. It's the moral imperative, vote down the greatest evil.
They agree with you on issues that are far more imporant than the ones you disagree on, so why would you disparage the lesser evil? Just stay on topic and encourage them to do the same, don't ridicule them for irrelevant behavior, lead by example.
I hate to be a stickler but acting against climate change, funding r&d, and ecological protection are all ethical issues aswell.
And meaning aboslutley does have a basis in science, although I'll excuse you for not knowing because it's very new, biosemiotics/semantics, which is a pretty amazing paradigm-shift if you ask me. I believe science makes a great basic for ethics, as in deep ecology.
Yes ethics do infact have a natural manifestation, interpreting value and sometimes meaning is the basis for life.

In what way?
I don't think so, Although I would go just for fun

>They agree with you on issues that are far more imporant than the ones you disagree on, so why would you disparage the lesser evil?
Because, in your words, the march 'is a prime opportunity to support a just cause and rally others to do so', and yet here they are hijacking it for ideological purpose. Though they may agree with me on issues that I view as more important than the ones we disagree on, the ones we disagree on are apparently more important to them, which shifts the focus of the march entirely.

>libtard

You misspelled goymmunist

>science is good
>we need to push our agenda
>let's claim that what we want to push is science
>people will associate this agenda with thus accepting it without doubt

was getting caught part of their plan?

...

Anthropocentric climate change being real is a matter for the scientific community. Whether or not we should do anything about it is an ethics issue.

>paradigm shift

what the hell is "environmental racism"

it's when the environment is racist

When you dump chemicals near the homes of poor people, Flint MI, etc.

so like natural selection? really gets the noggin joggin

are only black people poor? how is dumping chemicals near poor people racist?

Well duh it's real
>>paradigm shift
Literally a paradigm shift
www.informationphilosopher.com/presentations/Biosemiotics/status_report.html

>Though they may agree with me on issues that I view as more important than the ones we disagree on, the ones we disagree on are apparently more important to them, which shifts the focus of the march entirely.
What is going to help with that?
>viciously memeing them for being off topic, contributing to the further obfuscation of the topic and marginalizing what's imporant
or
>keeping them on topic and ignoring the irrelevant behavior, bolstering support for the cause
The answer is obvious

Except for the fact you're nothing but a tool to push their agenda and will be discarded and ignored when they get their way.
I'd rather pressure my congressmen and lobby for better funding than waste an afternoon with rebbitors cosplaying as Rick and Beaker and making popculture/popscience signs.

I wasn't telling you to March, I was telling you not to ridicule the March. Because it further delegitimizes the reason they were marching. It's just pragmatic not to marginalize allies
I would like people to think about science instead of what actually went down

What the fuck is intersexphobia?

>keeping them on topic
This isn't an option, though. For a certain type of people, identity politics IS the topic (regardless of what the context is). You'll never talk sense into them, and marching alongside them will only support their ideology, rather than achieving anything related to science.

>It's just pragmatic not to marginalize
People who insist on turning every rally into identity politics are NOT your allies. They are using the current interest in science to push their own ideology. They are not in any way interested in scientific issues.
Once a cause is infected with these types of people, it's very hard to get it back on track. You're better off pursuing other avenues.

This.

Look at more benign thing's they've infected like video games and movies.
They pretend to like you then once they're good with you they'll turn on you.

They're locusts and I want nothing to do with them especially since I know my field, biology, is next on their list.

>environmental racism
wat

Im sure thats what germans said about the nazis in WWII

Math people dont want to deal with some guys mentall illness.

Fear of a word that they didnt use properly that relates to people with chromosomal disorders that alter their sexual physiology

Let me cut right to the chase.
Natural human behavior is to protect your territory and kill intruders. This is made illegal by the immoral and unnatural treaties made by governments not people. The UN is an unnatural organization. Free men have always and will always fight for their right to live. If you are not autonomous you are not free.

>Anything with "science" in its name

Even here theres only mathfags and physfags. Most of biofags and chemfags get scared when they hear math, theres no point to even sharing memes with them.

That's actually really funny.

>colonization, immigration, native rights

it's an alt-right movement?

THEYRE GETTING INTO SCIENCE REEEEEEEEE

Climate change is obviously bullshit now given its promoted by literal mental ill people

Any thing that comes along saying it's science and wants your money is bullshit

Climate change is the definition of a scam

Please stop posting, it's truly exhausting and depressingly mundane to hear your nonlogic

The only way to prevent the social justice crowd from co-opting a movement is for it to explicitly come out against stuff they oppose.

*in support of
fuck i'm tired

The modern form of anti-intellectualism in the West excludes most STEM fields from the hate. You are actually an anti-intellectual if you "don't believe" in social sciences, economics, or humanities. You don't get a pass just because you "fucking love science" and follow black science man on Twitter.

>inaction is the same as conest in my eyes
well damn have you gotten them checkes recently you facist libcuck? maybe stop being so butt frustraited when anyone with a brain backs away from this anti science march

when its dark out and you take a pic and the nig nogs only show as teeth

>being this self centered
DONT INSULT SOMETHING I LIKE REEEEEEE.
Please just admit you're a libcuck and fuck off already. What neat-o pun did your cardboard sign have on it? The march for antiscience is over and look at all the good it did!!! Trump is now supppper smarts and will push what democrats want now! Congratz on the march well done.

>mfw liberals say the right is antiscience

>please don't ridicule this garbage
it gives science a bad name and makes it look idiotic. it deserves to be called trash. the (((march))) was shit

Aside from being against GMOs, which is over-stated anyway, name one issue that the left is wrong about when it comes to science. The right is anti-science in virtually every way.

Genetics
Genetics of intelligence
Mental disorders and GID
were all different but totally equal

>Could a scientist please explain these scientific issues to me?

well when it comes to the transsexual people, it seems like there's pretty good evidence that the sexually dimorphic parts of the brain in men that want to be women are similar to those parts of the brain in actual women, even before they start taking hormones.

[sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2016/gender-lines-science-transgender-identity/]

The real question is, what made their brains turn out that way? And is it actually more common now than it was before? It certainly seems that way, but these questions exist in such a flibbly flobbly area of statistical/scientific study that it's hard to draw a conclusion. It's probably an epigenetic effect. My suspicion is that it has to do with synthetic endocrine disruptor exposure in utero, but nobody will touch that area of research with a 10 foot pole.

Ultimately, the problem is that it's very unlikely that the people either chose this or that it was caused after birth. They were probably getting fucked over before they were born.

I'd really like to know the answer. If anyone can tell me, I'd like to know.

So basically you are just a dipshit "race realist". I hope you're aware that most scientists agree that race is not a biological reality. This has been studied and they found that there is more genetic variation within groups than between them.

YOU are the one who is peddling pseudo-science. Yet again you prove that the right doesn't really understand science at all.

Nuclear energy, genetics in general, vaccines, private research, a scientific view of ecology. Just nuclear energy is enough though.

Real scientists give 0 fucks about any of those "issues"...

Not the person you replied to but antivaxxers aren't exclusive to either side of the aisle.
Not sure what you mean about private research and "scientific view of ecology" either.

if you know someone with a "Science Is Not A liberal Conspiracy" T-shirt is not a scientist and you are, can you legally bitch slap them?

virtually every psychologist/neurologist (quietly) agrees that there are differences in average intelligence between human population groups

Because my opinion on them are objective scientific truths of the universe.

They are against companies investing in basic science and then profiting from that (monsanto) which I don't believe is a detrimental practice to science.

By ecology with unscientific would be not understanding that sometimes is ok to chop down trees if they become a plague (do to retarded unsustainable reforestation).

Obviously not everyone in the left thinks like that, but the same could be said about the right. Its retarded to divide things in such a reductive way and to try to mix politics and science. It's just a meme invented by the media and politicians to feel more "intelectual".

Also, thete have been higher budgetes to science in general over republican mandante over democrat. That's not "anti-science".

To expand I'm not justifying how the "right wing" has swayed people into unscientific trash, but I wouldn't say the "left" is scientifically literate. Few people adhere yo scientific discoveries and there's always some result that discovers the dissonance in people which inevitably falls down to people saying "science can't know everything" or "scientists shouldn't play god".

When niggers can't synthesize enough vitamin D due to the lack of sun in Northern Europe, that's a racist environment.

1. opposition to nuclear fission as an alternative to fossil fuels

2. opposition to funding for military research

3. opposition to any scientific criticism of climate change theory ( as well as suggestions of other climate based theories that might cause climate change theory to have to be rephrased) remember how we used to call it global warming but don't anymore? Or how in the 90's they believed cattle defecation was the primary source for greenhouse gas production?

4. Other fear mongering and sensationalizing on climate change issues (what ever happened to Florida being 20 feet under water by 2020?) Along with 'correlation = causation' attitudes and pragmatic, emotion based solutions

4. Support of pseudo-science and scientism

5. Politicization of academia, leading to certain areas on scientific research forbidden (such as human genetics and soon to be psychology) to a lesser extent this ties into funding, try to receive a grant for something that's unpopular and see how that goes. This is a direct result of political creep into scientific circles.

Stop giving it attention then.
When you give garbage attention you give it power.
Did we learn nothing in 2016?

>USA graduates fewer scientists per capita than many other countries
>is host to a movement such as this

wow im shocked

What are ypu trying to say?

Ecology.
Monsanto is a major threat to biodiversty.
Making industrial-scale monoculture possible which has been one of the worst things to happen to terrestrial ecosystems ever. Made extremely harmful agrochemicals with little accountability to the damage they caused, or prior concern for the harm they play.
They have aboslutley dismantled crop diversity, both in actually food plants and the ecological networks that go along with them, food webs, soil biota, plant-pollinator(and pollinators) networks, nutrient and water cycles, this has lead to the massive degradation of agricultural land, soil erosion, loss of soil carbon, loss of water table recharge and hydrological networks, soil acidification, the many detrimental effects of agricultural run off, and I could go on for quite some time. This has far reaching landscape level effects ranging from large scale aridification, biodiversty loss, earth system change, it also is on of the oldest drivers of wealth-inequality, which is even more detrimental to the environment, which I will avoid as you probably think many deeply connected issues are seperate from eachother and I don't have time to get into multiplexical networks with you. I could go on for quite some time.
I meet very few ecologically literate people, the ones that I do are usually liberterian-socialist types.
t. Ecologist

Feels good, it's exactly what you faggots deserve

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17522828 I seems it isn't as bad as you say.

WE

Except this is about ecosystem interactions of GMO crops
I was talking about the ecological consquences of the mode of production that was made possible by the agrochem/genetic engineering industry.
The link you posted really had nothing to do with what I was talking about. Monsanto is worse as an agrochem corporation.
We are talking about the company that made agent orange to war-crime and permafuck south veitnam. Not what I would call ethical.

Nuclear energy; and the SSC was backed by Regan you stupid nigger. March for Science is a faggot parade that hides behind the image of science

Half of the greatest mathematicians have had some sort of mental fuckery.

>Could a scientist please explain these scientific issues to me?

They aren't scientific issues, they are marxist class struggle issues.

They just slap the label "Science" on things to try to give it an air of authority and accuracy.