Post your best biology memes

I tell my kids they're called "dumb gay orange gook monkeys" if that makes you feel any better

Which one?

the OP

> gook monkeys

It's a parody of tumblr "quirky girl" memes

how am I not surprised a biofag likes spreading tumblr memes?

It's making fun of them ya dip

My professor no joke said the meme sentence TWICE in class today

>t. Librarian

>Biology memes
Conservation biology.

Marine biology

>bioinformemeics

Where do you teach?

hey fuck off marine biologys the fuckin best man if you're insulting marine bio then i honestly wish you death, you hear me? I WISH YOU DEATH only if youre insulting marine bio though

if you do like marine bio, i love ya buddo

Whats your expertise niche?

>TWICE
word

im in high school but im 18 so its okay
;^)

I like life science and physics though. And humans and chemistry.

>The highest paying Bio field is a meme

is it really?

"Bio"informatics is just computer science and mathematics, just like Genetics is just chemistry and statistics. Biology is not a hard science.

>biology
>Veeky Forums

...

biology

...

>CO boyfriend
sleep tight

kek

...

dude this meme is like tumblr level

for my fellow lab rats

>scream manuscript to nature over the phone
every time

...

bump

I am in a happy state of mind now thx

you mean Biology is the field where you have to learn some context before you're allowed to play with the numbers

His post doesn't make any sense anyway, he's just trying to justify hating on a field of research to feel better, you shouldn't bother.

>.rockpeg
my sides

>highest paying
top meme
bioinformatics is not a meme however

Kek, cant relate, but angry retards are fun.

Bump

250x affinity nigger
just bohr yourself

Alrighty then. Enjoy doing -omics and predicting protein structure by hand.

The moment you use one for the first time is like using heroin for the first time.

>inolying monkey has a meaning beyond the colloquial
Brainlet

What is that?

I actually think the after is plausible.

Why do neanderthals have to look like white dudes?

......because we know their genetic sequence.

I'm skeptical of the anthropomorphic depiction of Neanderthals.

Why are neanderthals white people with rhinophyma?

It was only about 60 years ago that we found out the Tyrannosaurus Rex didn't stand up right, (more similar to the human posture) dragging its tale along.

>I'm 'skeptical' of this one thing for race related reasons despite its solid foundation of genetic evidence.
>Here is a random example of when scientists got something wrong from 60 years ago to support my 'skepticism'.

I'm skeptical of the fact that you are not a nigger.

newscientist.com/article/dn22308-europeans-did-not-inherit-pale-skins-from-neanderthals/

Geneticists don't know what the Neanderthals looked like. The ones that likely bred with humans likely had dark hair and dark skin.

Neanderthals are white washed, so what else has been augmented to fit their discoverer's features?

i dunno what's dumber rocks and sea-slime turning into fish via abiogenesis, or dinosaurs turning into birds via evolution.

either way biology should stick to taxonomy and medicine, everything else it seems to get wrong

>newscientist

That's a fallacy

To be fair to that user, that's not a fallacy, it's a fallacious implied argument.

I think it's not an unreasonable argument to posit that perhaps the reason why scientists misjudged dinosaurs- and why throughout history we tend to anthropomorphize various things- is the human desire to relate that slants the way we view data. It's not inaccurate then, to posit that the majority of scientists that work on projects related to modeling neanderthals are white, so there's cause to at least question whether or not it's the same kind of bias at play.

Why are you so triggered that someone would make a kind of argument like this? Do you have an inferiority complex?

>Why are you so triggered? Do you have an inferiority complex?

Don't leap to shithouse pop psych ad hominem conclusions like this if you are going to take the 'reasonable 3rd party observer' stance, mate.

What triggers me is the implied conspiracy which people like that other user feel the need to conjure around their revisionist arguments, as if it should be taken for granted that Westerners, even Western scientists for chrissakes have been sneakily foisting their cultural perogatives on the landscape of human knowledge for generations, as if we are just supposed to accept and take for granted a concealed logical leap from (people are subliminally influenced by associative factors) to (white intellectual output should be weighed against in all cases with an a priori skepticism to the effect that it perpetuates a white agenda).

You can pretend impartiality, but that's not actually possible, the political discourse here is only semi-articulated, and so adherence to one articulated proposition binds you to several politically loaded but sub-vocalised assumptions.

I almost lengthened out my original post to acknowledge the premise of the other user's example re dinosaur posture: ie that it was an attempt to extend one form of self-association (anthropomorphism) to another form of self-association (making neanderthals white) - however this link upon which his argument was based was too tenuous and blatantly agenda-driven for me to believe it worth addressing. Obviously not, if you bought it, though.

>cont

>cont

The fact is that his dinosaur example itself carriers hidden and political-motivated assumptions to the effect that Biology at the Turn of the Century was conducted as a form of ignorant self-projection as opposed rational reflection on a body of scientific knowledge simply smaller than our own. It was perfectly logical, (before we knew the mechanics of avian hips and counterbalancing with the tail) to assume that the T-rex would want to maximise its visibility and profile with an upright posture or at least the capability for standing upright. It does not speak to some kind of intrinsic Western incapability for objectivity or thinking outside of our own context, in the way that the other user accuses.

There does not need to be any anthropomorphism going on there at all, especially considering that these were not ad hoc assumptions being made, but lengthy scientific debates.

Historical revisionists like that other user NEED to use ignorant caricatures to discredit Western intellectuals as much as possible, because only then can they have everyone believing that history can be re-written at a stroke, on some tiny scrap of contrary evidence, and that everything in the orthodox body of knowledge is simply the product of 'bias'. It is sophistry in its worst form.

Neanderthals in cold climate environments could easily and sensibly be assumed to be pale for the same reasons that humans living for extended periods in these environments are. And yet the way the political discourse is at the moment - a discourse from which NO ONE in our society is subliminally exempted - it has become not just possible, but even EASY for anons like that to pass off minimum-content and grossly conspiratorial historical revisionism as some kind of modern day 'wisdom'. In fact it is nothing more than cultural subversion, an attack being disguised as a lesson.

You may feel objective and impartial when you agree with that BS, but you are just being duped.

Btw just read the article you posted mate. It literally says that Neanderthals had pale skin and reddish hair.

The only point its making that's vaguely connected to what your spouting is that humans and neanderthals in europe did interbreed much and therefore became light skinned on a separate basis.

Your argument, which is facetious revisionist drivel for all the reasons I went into above, also has ZERO evidence to stand on.

I would find another board if I were you. This stuff isn't your strong suit.

Pipettor

>biologists

this is gold

But its true user! Dinosaurs magically turned into birds overnight!

Don't believe those lies that only a tiny fraction of some "dinosaurs" slowly evolved small adaptive changes over the course of millions and millions of years in response to selective pressures.

NO! It happened in a blink of an eye! AND IT WUZ THINGS LIKE T REX SUDDENLY CHANGING INTO A BLACKBIRD!

Now hurry along and play in the street, its nearly rush hour.

Anyone know any interesting/promising topics in bio or chemistry? I'm thinking of doing graduate school but can't figure out how to choose a program

Geology for chemistry or Paleontology for bio

see

Honestly it would be a childhood dream but I don't think there would be much opportunities out there

Mother fucking hero user, good work.

>humans in colder less sunny environments tend to be paler
>humans in coldest least sunny environment wuz blak

kek

>Not holding the pipette upright at all times
ROOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>not being a Scientist VII
"Technician II" spotted