![13221028_10153689142371275_6419110161279460263_n[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/FLna4MP.jpg "13221028_10153689142371275_6419110161279460263_n[1].jpg")
This is so true.
>>74034987
republitards BTFO
>>74034987
source?
>>74034987
Sage
>the ones who could stomach eight years of university are usually libshits
Well, (You) made me reply.
>>74034987
>Science research funded by government
Not too surprising.
shit, I guess im bernie sanders
>a scientific community exemplified by self-fellation, ousting people with different ideas, blacklisting anyone attempting to publish material different to the majority, and ultimately corrupt as fuck.
>mostly democrat.
Color me surprised.
>>74034987
>grant revoked
True science isn't being done anymore. The engineers are more important. People that become scientists now are the fucking losers of society that can't provide value so they go and suck dick to get a government grant to study snails' fucking habits.
>>74034987
What is "The Ivory Tower?" The one thing the vast majority of scientists don't know: human nature and the average schlub.
>>74034987
Nice source you've got there.
And if this was true those 6% would probably be the smartest most successful scientists anyway.
how many are just neither or moderate?
>>74034987
Again
>>74034987
If you count gender studies as science.
>>74035125
>Source: My Ass
I am now a #CruzMissle
>>74035359
most of them are paid like 35k a year to work at the university they paid 150k to get a degree from. Engineers are cunts but at least you guys aren't stupid enough to take meme tier jobs.
>>74035292
>they don't agree with me?
>they must be corrupt!
>>74035359
Typical capitalist.
Places more value on how much money you make than the actual value of your work to humanity.
>>74034987
Most scientists don't give a shit about politics and vote for whoever will give them more funding.
it's way higher than that. also not like the complement of that number is the number of democrat scientists. scientists tend to be fairly conservative in a lot of ways, but are generally socially "I don't give a fuck".
>>74035400
>cuckservative in this much denial
>>74034987
>>74035593
The Eternal Anglo meme is true isn't it?
I am but a simple hispanic, tending to my Zim Zam shrine.
0% of scientists have gotten laid before
>>74034987
You were saying, Faggot?
100% of economists who understand economics are Republican.
>>74035689
Don't most republicans believe that dinosaurs coexisted with humans?
It's astounding that they managed to to finish high school let alone become scientists.
As usual, /pol/ hates facts except when they support their own right wing agenda.
>>74034987
>The faculty of the most r-selected institutions in the Western world are r-strategists
Color me shocked.
>>74035746
Awww man awww sheeiiiiiit I didn't think of this before what cucks right? xD xD too bad white men pushing our civilization forward aren't getting laid haha brah.
>>74035816
The right has its creationists.
The left has its global warming cultists.
Both are religious beliefs unsupported by science.
>>74035292
>THESE PEOPLE PRESENT WELL REASONED AND CONCLUSIVE PROOF THAT I'M A FUCKING RETARD OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE CORRUPT REEEEEEE
>>74035224
No Republicans in gov. You sure got him.
You got me, I'm now a proud #CruzMissile
But real talk, just because people excel in one specific field does not in any way imply they have a credible or well-informed opinion in another. Furthermore, the majority of people who can stomach 8 years of liberal infested uni are - you guessed it - liberals.
>>74034987
>This is so true.
Only fags make a post with no source.
Therefore, OP is a fag.
>>74036005
>Proof
Such as?
nothing here convinced me otherwise
tryhard republicans
>>74036025
that's not the point dipshit, the right side is the one with the trend of not funding certain research, while the left side is the one funding anything and everything because fuck morality
Also google search fags it takes 5 seconds
I know everyone will just ignore my post and stay ignorant, but I can at least try.
>>74035746
Epic post, friend.
>>74035424
>start off with baseless assumption
>continue with le ivory tower meme
ebin
saw the same meme but
6% of Scientists are black
>>74035946
>don't insult muh cool scientist men
>they push society forward and doesn't afraid of anything
>>74035060
No...
Its mainly hurting democrats...
>>74034987
6% of scientists actually do science.
No one has an explanation for why the rest have a job.
>>74034987
No surprise there.
The Democrats are always willing to throw the taxpayer's money at grants to academia, while the Republicans oppose extending the government's role that far.
>>74034987
>source-less image
>expected to be taken seriously
lm
ao
>>74036152
>39% don't vote
not surprising desu. I actually expected more non voters among researchers and scientists.
Also what constitutes "scientist" by slate standards? The term is broad as fuck.
>>74034987
Fuck off liberal piece of shit.
All liberal opinions are shills and will not be tolerated.
>>74036119
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/may/06/top-ten-global-warming-skeptic-arguments-debunked
>>74035400
Gender scientists lol
>>74035992
Pretty sure most scientists agree on global warming m8. 97% to be exact.
I'm sure that the remaining 3% are all republicans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
Like I said, /pol/ hates facts that don't support their right wing agenda.
>>74036282
39% don't vote democratic/republican *
>>74036298
>All liberal opinions are shills and will not be tolerated.
Wow. The extra chromosome isn't even implicit in this one. You're waving it around like faggots do dicks at a gay pride parade.
>>74034987
>One party provides grants and kick backs for pointless academia research like why blacks live near garbage heaps
>Surprised when people in industry vote for party that subsidizes them.
Most scientists are unpoliticized proles who have no idea what they are talking about. Like Neil De Grasse Tyson, actually no smarter than the average joe when it comes to something they are untrained in.
>>74034987
le really makes you think
>>74036282
considering most "scientists" work in non-operational fields, or if they do work in operational fields, they spend their days filling beakers and putting things into a refrigerator,
I'd say its no surprise they want bigger government to pay for their pseudo-intellectual pursuits like naming rocks and trying to define erratic behavior in humans.
>>74036313
?
>>74036298
>opinions
I'm done, /pol/ is so bluepilled it's sad
>>74034987
That's because you gotta have creationist scientists too, after all USA is a democracy and religion has to be everywhere.
>>74035454
This. A lot of bullshit programs are called """""science""""" these days.
Wow omg really makes you think man...
>>74034987
>No source
Meanwhile, if you look at Congress, the overwhelming majority of practicing doctors and scientists there are Republicans.
NEXT
>>74034987
94% of scientists are welfare queens
>>74036426
the difference between black science man and the average Joe, black science man believes science has killed philosophy and that his years of filling beakers is an adequate replacement.
>>74036298
The sad thing is there's actually people like this.
>>74036061
Libtards' only sources are MUH FEELS
>>74036362
>How to get 97%: The picture
Fucking moron.
>>74036535
The final scientific achievement will be Matrix welfare. Just enjoy your stay, you'll not moving anywhere, food is provided to you by tubes.
>>74036384
I'd expect less than 5% of them vote third party so its still a sizeable chunk of non voters.
>>74036313
I don't agree with the "climate change isn't real" meme but a lot of this article is basing itself off of guesses in order to disprove guesses from the skeptics.
>>74036562
Well its the same for anyone in the sciences who win a nobel prize or become a public figure, similar to stupid hollywood actors they begin to believe their opinion on completely unrelated subjects to their trade are suddenly their expert purview.
>>74036449
>?
Not an argument.
>>74035125
Source: Image created by Democrat
>>74036535
By that logic, so are soldiers, policemen, firefighters, astronauts, etc...
Why do right-wingers think that anything funded by the govt is autmatically bad?
>>74036426
>Black Science Man
>Not political
Puck one.
>>74036657
It was implied Stefan
Just the other day we were talking about global cooling, now global warming. How do you explain that?
>>74036716
No he is very political, but extremely uninformed on anything civics or economics related and talks out his ass just like any other retard twitter user. The difference is just like an actor on television liberal retards view them as authority figures on policy, for some fucking reason.
Well if 6% of scientists are Republicans.
And you didn't specify American scientists.
And Republicans being a strictly American party.
Then shucks, I don't think USA could have more than 10% of the worlds scientists, not with Europe and East Asia plodding away.
Looks like most scientists in America are Republican.
>>74036669
That's more libertarian senpai. Most Right wing is usually heavily in favor of military and law enforcement spending which is funded by the government. Firefighters are almost always mostly volunteer. Especially in rural areas.
>>74036629
>>74036669
The right is not anti-government. You're thinking of anarchists.
The right is anti-unconstitutional government, which these days means 95% of the left's agenda.
>>74036669
That's a libtard meme. The Constitution calls for an army, and firefighters and policemen are a service everyone can pretty much agree to. People are divided on astronauts though. Stop making strawmans though, you look silly.
>>74036716
He's political but a retard. His views on literature are sophmoric at best.
>>74036801
>these scientists and celebrities have no business getting involved in politics
Of course they do. They're citizens just like you. Do you really think you're somehow more informed than others because you've read some infographics on /pol/?
They are as much authority figures on political matters as anyone else.
>>74035551
Kek
>>74034987
>94% of government employees agree with expanding the size of government
Medical student here, totally conservative. I don't have time to take stupid questionnaires.
>>74036902
>look mommy I got published
>all those shitty universities
>cant do your own research so you just summarize others
>probably published in a low tier shitty 'journal'
everything shitty about academia in one image
>>74034987
>>74036669
Why are Brits so enamoured with sharia law, Mohammed?
>>74034987
Just shows you who the Jews prefer to fund.
>>74035454
hahaha epic meme XDDD
>>74037026
No, they are not authority figures, they are part of the democratic discussion and can be civic ally involved but their talk holds no more water than a burger flipper.
They don't talk about economic models, or theories behind political outcomes local and comparative or anything part of the study that shapes and defines policy. Most people talk out their ass or are manipulated to believe a certain factless lie.
But the truth is if you actually study economics and know how models are made and what effective incentives look like then of course your policy solutions will be better than the average proles.
>>74036777
Scientific consensus changes you fucking idiot. We thought four to five hundred years ago that the world was the centre of the universe. That doesn't fucking mean that modern astronomy is all bullshit.
>>74034987
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
94% of scientists are liberal.
That's the same percentage of scientists the Left claims supports the climate change swindle.
maybe they're neither republican or democrat. The best minds seem to find faults in both parties
>>74036625
>le ebin librul feels meme
simbly ebicccc man XDDDDD
>>74034987
>no sauce
>no links
>trash.jpeg
>>74037268
strawman.jpg
>>74036642
Which guesses in the article would you be referring to?
>>74037167
>>74037026
The problem is the weight that their opinion carries much more public weight than the average citizen despite being uneducated.
Could you imagine the typical /pol/ user spamming "gas the kikes! race war now!reeeee" was taken as authority by a large number of regular citizens?
>>74037268
>strawman image
>political ideologies I don't like are mental illnesses
Hello Brezhnev.
>>74034987
Misleading since I'd bet most are independent, the best scientists tend to be super autists who give no fucks about politics.
>>74034987
>no link
>claims his pic has relevant info
on tyrome you can report back to your terrorist cell on facebook and tell them you fooled us all
>>74034987
>implying scientists aren't the ultimate mercenaries and shill for whoever is funding their research
>>74037155
>medical student
>scientist
top kek
Keep learning those latin words, repeat and repeat.
>tfw republican scientist
"fitting in"""""
>>74037265
And the ice age happened because...?
>>74037187
Because it's the will of the Prophet (pbuh). I wouldn't expect a filthy kuffar like you to understand.
>>74037255
My point was that they are about as informed as the average /pol/ poster.
Unless you majored civics or economics then you're really no more informed about politics than anyone else. Watching a few Alex Jones videos on YouTube doesn't make you an expert all of a sudden m8.
You are, however, entitled to your opinion.
>>74035292
wow underrated post! anyone who's ever tried to work in the 'community' knows this post to be a fucking understatement at the least.
>>74037480
Get to the point.
>>74037502
But I have studied civics and economics but i wouldn't expect you to read between the lines there. That's what I'm saying, nothing these people say is any more politically or economically correct than spewed garbage.
If you want to get technical not a single candidate running for the presidency has a single policy based in economic theory.
science professors claim to be liberal, but then they pay their grad students who actually do the research about $25k/yr while demanding 80+ hr weeks (in organic synthesis at least) which seems to be at odds with certain trendy democratic talking points.
and this money doesnt even come out of their own pocket, it comes from the grants aka taxpayer.
they would rather maximize their research productivity strictly for personal glory in place of paying their grad students the famous $15.
really a bunch of fucking hypocrites.
>>74037641
I'm asking you why the ice age happened.
>>74034987
The truth about human race is hidden in history and archeology.
>>74037641
Muzzy fuzzy
>>74034987
Publicly Republican*
Also, fucking source
>>74036298
Hope you like it you fucking downie.
>>74036362
The earth is rising in temperature, that cannot be disputed, but blaming it on humans is idiotic. Our wasteful and destructive industrial practices may do other bad things, but heating up the planet is not one of them.
>>74034987
Blacks are 2% scientists. Scientists have no explanation that they're allowed to publish for why that number is so high.
>mfw Liberals claim to be on the side of science but want to shrink the military budget
>>74037381
>The problem is the weight that their opinion carries much more public weight than the average citizen despite being uneducated.
That doesn't make their opinion any less valid.
>>74037681
So you're saying that everyone who has studied civics and economics agrees with you 100%?
Even the experts disagree amongst themselves.
>>74037829
Good point.
>>74037737
4°C changes in the atmosphere. OVER THOUSANDS OF YEARS.
It isn't natural that the atmosphere change up to 2.5 degrees in the space of 25.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/decadaltemp.php
>>74037849
It is not even the right way round
>>74038001
Good lawd don't tell me Farrage took on Brand?
>>74038061
Since when did a muzzy fuzzy care about science
>>74036362
>>74038076
That's how much of an idiot he is.
>>74037849
Top kekkers my funny meme man!
>>74038110
>singapore
>muslim
American education, everybody.
>>74038011
No, but the ideas spouts in the civic square are not even on the spectrum of what the experts are arguing about. Take minimum wage, you would be hard pressed to find a economist who would actually support it yet it is policy de-facto because it is popular. There are clear answers to many questions that are argued in policy unreasonably. If your end goal is GDP there are very clear sets of what to do to maximize it that no one follows. But of course that is not the complete end goal so there is disagreement.
>>74036167
-t. buttmad lefties and berniedrone
>>74038302
>tfw not the only autistic swissfag online at 5
>>74038194
Sorry I don't take the time out of my day to look up things about insignificant shit holes. But I just did and
>15% muzzy fuzzy
So there is basically about a 1 in 6 chance you could be one
>>74038252
The problem with politics is that you have to look at things from multiple angles.
Sure, from a purely economic perspective, the minimum wage seems silly. But from a social perspective it's all but essential.
There's more to politics than economics.
>>74037896
Why is that idiotic?
Are you denying the fact that Co2 emissions are eroding the ozone layer?
>>74037480
Certainly not global warming
>>74037896
go look at any rural ambient temperatures for the last 200 years. There is no correlation between risiing CO2 and rural temperature.
in fact, rural temperatures have remained fairly steady for 200 years. there's always peaks and valleys. but you can average them out to less than one percent change overtime.
>>74038469
Of course, there is flawed institutions that allow poor policy outcomes, and informed interests that push policy onto the populace to keep unoptimal outcomes in their favor. But really all it comes down to is shit flinging or interest grouped agendas, nothing being talked about in the public square by politicians or people actually solve problems.
Democracy has unilaterally failed at creating good for people and this is more than evident.
>>74038467
>insignificant shithole
>11th most developed country
>higher life expectancy than america
>higher gross national income per capita
>higher employment rate
>homicide rate 20 times lower
K.
>>74034987
define "scientist"
>>74036825
potato man understands
>>74038800
>>74038873
That, and the claim is completely unsourced, so I doubt it's true.
>>74034987
And yet the vast majority of Engineers, people who make the world work, are conservatives
>>74038110
Also, even if I got myself baptised in nitroglycerin or whatever they do at the local mosque how exactly does this disprove my point?
>>74038469
>Are you denying the fact that Co2 emissions are eroding the ozone layer?
No, but ozone itself is a huge GHG so why the fuck does eroding it make the earth warmer?
Earth gets hotter > Clouds Form from water vapor > Clouds reflect heat.
>>74036362
a consensus of scientists =/= fact
pretty sure most scientists agree the world was flat before, haven't they?
plus your data is old, it's actually climate change now buddy ;)
>>74039160
Because then it doesn't block out UV radiation and gamma rays from the sun?
>>74039076
I'm just baiting you. I didn't disprove or disagree or even read anything you said
>>74036825
Do you have any idea how many biotech firms there are in Massachusetts alone?
Do you have any idea how many universities there are in the US?
10%? GTFOH!
>>74038011
It's not that their opinions are invalid, it's mostly a problem I perceive that lies within social media politics. It's created a new form of drive by political discussion that relies only on catchy headlines and no substance. It exists on both sides of the political spectrum. A tweet such as "muslims are ruining Europe! SAD!" from Donald Trump will gain millions of views but the average person will not go out of their way to learn if this position is a valid one, and why/why not.
>>74034987
This is absolutely bullshit. Different departments have different %'s for political leaning. Engineering (Biomedical especially) departments are no comparison to, say, social science departments.
>>74035746
>>74035359
>>74035292
>>74035224
>>74035171
These are such lame fucking responses to lame fucking bait. They are reddit tier.
>>74039535
to extend on this, a tweet from say George Clooney, can say something like "Donald trump is a moron! he's racist!" will also gain a ton of attention but no one will go out of their way except for people already politically engaged with Trump to see if this is true. All these tweets do is reaffirm beliefs among their followers and nothing more. It's creating a new generation of sport spectator politics.
>It's a /pol/ denies man made climate change episode
I'm not sure what it is about this, and shit like religion and abortion, that just makes you guys go pants on head retarded.
>>74039772
contrarianism is the basis of this board anon. Being a libertarian became mainstream among non liberal college students so /pol/ went full neocon
So, Egypt, you got anything, or did you fuck off?
>>74035593
Money represents value
If someone is willing to drop big money for your product then they value it greatly
Therefore, anything that makes a lot of money is of great value to humanity
Cuck
>>74036142
>the right side is the one with the trend of not funding certain research
the ones their lobbiers told them not to or the ones that challenge their faith
>>74036503
>gets literally btfo
>doesnt even counter argument, just replies to a non argument post
>>74036298
>All liberal opinions are shills and will not be tolerated.
fuck off faggot go cry to your trump body pillow cunt
>>74034987
The "scientists" that have the time to persue politcal ideology clearly aren't our best and brightest.
>>74040380
>persue
>>74040042
So I guess Justin Bieber's latest record is of more value to humanity than space exploration.
Fucking capitalists.
Is this registered Repubs? If so, no shit, I imagine the majority of scientists are independents just like most of the population
>>74040612
>fuck the capitalists
then why did you pay them for your computer tard
>>74035816
>some fb tier macro
>facts
>>74034987
>Bureaucrat in a lab coat = "scientist"
>>74034987
>have no explantion for why that number is so high
95% of jobs in science come from government pork spending. Liberals love gibs. Explanation given. OP BTFO.
DAAAAAAAAAYUUUUUUUUUM
>>74038109
he's a pahnd shap Enoch Powell - and we gotta watch 'im
>>74039954
>neocon
>Pol
Uwot9
>>74035688
>an image background makes a meme
No, dipshit, a meme is a commonly passed around idea.
Believing that most people thought the earth was round in the middle ages is a meme.
Believing that Nazis turned jews i to soap amd lampshades is a meme.
The way you've presented it defines a meme as any words written on a background image.
A meme could be anything, and isnt a meme until a large amount of people pass it around.
>>74036442
/thread
>>74037167
>americaneducation.png
>womyn's studies counted as "science"
The percent of Republican scientists have physical sciences degrees, not "social" sciences loltifications
>>74034987
probably because 99% are not American
>>74037332
I heard you guys were passing a law to execute drug dealers with their own supply. Is that true?
>>74034987
>tfw my graduate stat phys professor literally escaped the Soviet Union, moved to the US, became a naturalized citizen, and is now a Trump supporter who shows up to class every day in his MAGA hat
>>74041997
That's already the law as far as I'm aware.
>>74035454
Social Sciences*
ftfy, Ahmed.
They're just humanities, not sciences at all.
>>74034987
>thinking /pol/ likes the american republican party
i dare you to find one person here that will defend the GOP
>>74034987
you forgot the Occupy Democrats watermark
>>74034987
Democrats are more likely to piss money away on research grants.
that's the beginning and the end of that. their livelihood depends on it.
ITT: desperation
Academic scientists are usually the guys that couldn't hack it in the real world. All the real cutting edge science is being done in secret within corporate-owned labs. It really is no surprise that the same people who diddle around in fancy government-sponsored labs with no need to actually produce anything end up voting Democrat.
>>74038061
>4°C changes in the atmosphere. OVER THOUSANDS OF YEARS.
I wasn't aware that scientists have been taking accurate measurement of the average global temperature over a span of thousands of years
>>74042438
They'll whine and gripe about the GOP, but still vote for it in the end.
It was the same with Ron Paul and libertarians, it was the same with the the tea party, and it's the same with Trump.
Smart Republicans get tired of the party's consistent failure and decide to break off into what they claim is a wholly separate and ideologically unique position, and still end up voting the same R while feeling smug about themselves.
Trump isn't new, he's just the current generation of the denial. Trump supporters are the new tea parties, the new libertarians.
>>74042925
Do you seriously believe we have no way of determining atmospheric temperature in the past?
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/schmidt_01/
>>74039954
>so /pol/ went full neocon
I don't know many /pol/ posters who support unlimited migration of brown trash for the purposes of enriching wall street.
>>74043223
those data can tell you that there were patterns in weather over time. they cannot yield direct nor precise measurements of temperature. at best, you can make assumptions about their correlation to temperature, which adds more noise to the data.
as a result, you cannot say for certain that the current changes are unprecedented.
>>74043223
Yes I seriously believe that we have no way of determining atmospheric temperature in the past to a level of accuracy that is within a few degrees. To believe otherwise is just shitfucking retarded. Climate scientists manipulate all that old "data" all the time to make their models work.
>>74043708
And yet it still doesn't lend credence to the fact that it's natural for the average temperature to rise by 2-3° within the span of twenty five years.
Also calling it an assumption is heavily misleading.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-are-past-temperatures/
>Temperature, in contrast, is not measured directly, but is instead inferred from the isotopic composition of the water molecules released by melting the ice cores.
>>74043909
>Climate scientists manipulate all that old "data" all the time to make their models work.
[citation needed]
>>74036902
>first name on the paper is an Australian cartoonist
>somehow I'm supposed to take a cartoonist's opinion seriously
>>74035292
This is pretty much the case with science on smoking being "bad" for you.
>>74044031
The method described in that article have not been validated for providing the level of accuracy that would be required to prove any current climate trends. They are mostly only useful for studying relative temperatures and long-term temperature variation patterns.
>>74044065
Both of your posted links admit that the methods described don't provide entirely accurate readings. Did you even read them?
>>74041503
>Falling for the meme meme
>>74044031
>is instead inferred from the isotopic composition of the water molecules released by melting the ice cores.
my issue, while the reasoning seems sound, is that it's not a terribly valid way of measuring temperature. there are a myriad number of things that also affect isotope ratios, of which temperature is a single factor. as a result, the climate data inferred are incredibly noisy, and practically worthless if you're trying to investigate a very, very weak signal, like a change of a few degrees over thousands of years.
REALLY
MAKES
YOU
THINK
Almost every single republican I have met,, has been an engineer/ mathematician/ doctor,/ or high end industrial corporate manager.
Most politicians seem to major in things that can not get you a job int he real world outside of living on the dough QED
>>74044461
Doesn't mean the readings were manipulated you fucking idiot.
>>74044461
exactly.
because scientists are using an oblique interpretation of data to determine temperature, it's very, very noisy.
it would be like trying to determine how much it rained in December from a dry piece of moss found the following July. yes, the growth of the moss is related to the rainfall, but there are myriad other factors in play.
>>74044943
not manipulated, just shitty.
>>74044667
Except nothing actually tells you exactly how off the readings would be. Sure, there may be a degree of inaccuracy, but simply taking a large number of samples and cross-referencing would eliminate the static heavily.
>>74045049
You could easily test this just by running a OLS regression on their data. If the estimated temperature has a high correlation to the isotope content then they're right, if the correlation is low or there are large unexplained variables then it would be evident in the regression.
>>74036362
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
>>74045139
Problem is that he claimed they WERE manipulated. Still waiting on a source for that.
>>74045632
>This hypothesis had little support in the scientific community
Also, see here: >>74037265
>>74045649
Yes because I'm gonna go out of my way to provide a source so i can convince some dirty singaporean on the internet.
>>74034987
Smart Republicans go into business; smart Democrats become professors.
>>74045818
>I DON'T NEED PROOF TO BACK UP MY ARGUMENTS REEEEEEEEE
More like you don't HAVE proof. How fucking delusional can you be?
>>74036167
Oh lordy. It is called a thesis statement. And if you look up this video you will see that he goes on to demonstrate that lots of sacred cows of the left in fact have no basis for belief, other than it makes people on the left feel good.
I'll give you a hint on a few. Diversity has no demonstrable benefits. In fact it has negatives as seen by Harvard sociologist, Putnam's research, where it showed the more diversity in an area the lower the levels of trust and charity were seen in the area between all groups.
Hint, minimum wage laws don't work either.
>>74035593
>they must be corrupt!
Most American universities offer four-year, 100+ credit-hour programs in fields such as nutrition or physical fitness. The same publications which are used as a basis for determining tenure in professors are regularly having their names dragged in the dirt for publishing studies with erroneous methods. The concept of geochronology, the basis of many theories that are taught even in elementary school, has been utterly shaken by the fact that recent studies show solar flares and nuclear events completely disrupt radioactivity in materials used to determine approximate age of a rock layer; no one wants to discuss what it means that our entire fossil record no longer has any scientific basis and is entirely based on 'educated' guesses (note, for example, how no two broadly similar species ever coexisted in history, each is always the ancestor to the next. This is unlike real life, where wolves and dogs seem to share the same timeframe just fine, as do African and Asian elephants. Anthropologists are just beginning to grudgingly agree that maybe neanderthals and homo sapiens sapiens co-existed in Europe only after evidence became too difficult to ignore, such as groups of skeletons from both species that shared tools being found in the same cave) The only 'shock' in stating the corruption of modern science is merely that there is someone stating what is already assumed.
>>74038061
>4°C changes in the atmosphere. OVER THOUSANDS OF YEARS.
>
>It isn't natural that the atmosphere change up to 2.5 degrees in the space of 25.
>Assumes linear interpolations
>>74034987
Engineer here. Most engineers I meet are conservative. Science is overrun by liberals who can't handle the real world hiding in the lab sucking the government teat. Engineers produce results.
First of all co2 is the only good thing we put into our atmosphere, you know plants and humans breathe and process it right?
Secondly you cannot accurately predict or measure climate change due to abberations and Lack of Data - we have no had thermometers for that long, nor spread so widely and recorded so often. Abberations = Sun Cycles
Sun Cycles have a HUGE effect on global temperatures.
The bottom line is nobody knows for "sure" anything about climate change because the equation is ridiculously complex and we have very little data.
>>74037328
Not really man, that is an accurate restatement of what many on the left believe. It is just jarring to you because people on the left don't rationally think about their positions based of what they believe to be fundamental principles of fairness, equity, and morality. It is more just a rationalization of their initial "gut reaction" to any particular situation.
I like how people are dissing people that give them their quality of life.
I mean, without scientists, we wouldn't have the internet and would not be having this conversation.
>>74034987
Scientist here. Every scientist I know is republican. I've never met an actual liberal scientist.
>>74034987
Probably because they support big government, the ones that actually give them funds for their research. Like any government worker, they play with other people's money.
>>74046665
I think you would be surprised to find out how many scientists are actually of very "average" intelligence. There are of course many standout geniuses in the field who have made some very important discoveries - but I think your example of the internet was actually developed by engineers, electricians, and programmers. Not necessarily scientists.
>>74046665
Hmm... that convinces me. I am going to toss aside all my worries about spending hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars to restructure an economy to eliminate the most plentiful and most cheaply used source of energy all on the unproven worries of people, with a vested interest in maintaining their funding, even though their model predictions have been wrong, all because I don't want to "dis" them because other people who shared a similar title to them made neat things.
I'm convinced man. I will start saving my feces to make dung bricks to heat my home.
/pol/ getting ass blasted by an infographic
>>74036362
Consensus isn't science
Also, fyi, using scientists as a blanket term is another way to mislead-Not all scientists are masters of the same field. Biologists and engineers are both scientists, but that doesn't mean that they could explain the others field properly.
>>74044234
Inhaling smoke being bad for you doesn't really need clear science.
>>74046396
>note, for example, how no two broadly similar species ever coexisted in history
They did? Trilobytes?
M.S. Atmospheric Sciences Valparaioso University
Modern meteorological models have more than 1,600 weather balloons worth of real time data pumped into them on a daily basis and still can't predict the exact path of a low pressure system until the day of the event.
The data sets that climate models have to work with are laughably inadequate.
>>74046904
You'll notice they have somehow developed the ability to see into the future with that graph but the actual data starts a cooling trend in 2008.
Cycle 23[edit]
This cycle lasted 11.6 years, beginning in May 1996 and ending in January 2008. The maximum smoothed sunspot number (monthly number of sunspots averaged over a twelve-month period) observed during the solar cycle was 120.8 (March 2000), and the minimum was 1.7.[15] A total of 805 days had no sunspots during this cycle.
>>74044065
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/noaanasa-dramatically-altered-us-temperatures-after-the-year-2000/
This is related to NOAA, but there was also on site temperatures altered at various sites in the past 5 years. I will look for more of that.
>>74044138
you know there are a lot of people with the same first and last name?
>>74046665
The vast majority of "scientists" involved in academia are completely worthless. Most contribute nothing of actual value to the world. Science in general is a very useful tool, but lets not pretend everyone who uses it is worthy of praise.
>>74040990
Not addressing his argument. Anyway products are nice, but Capitalist mindset leads to an eventual lack of development in areas deemed unprofitable. Money is of not of value to humanity as a whole, it's a play object we use to barter. Things of human value are what end up improving our species sustainability.
>>74047050
Not all species of trilobytes survived. That's the nature of competition.
0.05% of scientists are niggers
>>74034987
phd student in systems biology. i'm republican this time around. but, yes most if not all my colleagues are democrat. good thing scientists don't care about your political affiliation only your abilities
>>74035688
>put it on a meme
Scientific facts that liberals deny:
* the innate proficiency, preference and behavioural differences between the sexes
* the existence of races based on clusters of traits and the persistent IQ differences between those races
Bascially any evidence against the dogma that "EVERYONE IS EXACTLY THE SAME" is shamed and silenced by liberals
>>74035060
fpbp
>>74036282
I post on /sci/ and im a republican! Did they count me?
>>74034987
are republicans even humans?
>>74034987
Since the overwhelming majority of scientists are atheists or agnostics, we're basically not allowed to be republicans according to republicans.
>implying most scientists are the current type of leftist 'liberal'
>>74048984
There is still time anon. You can still turn to God. Won't interfere in your scienceploration one bit.
>>74047563
But they coexisted, didn't they?
>>74046979
engineers are not scientists... unless said engineers go into higher ed and do research as a PhD in which case they can be called scientists or researchers
>>74049438
For a time, until they either killed eachother or one species ate the other's food.
>>74049432
>You can still turn to God.
Nah I'll pass.
>>74034987
Source?
>>74050053
Ok, but offer is always open.
>>74034987
Because the other 94 percent could never get fucking laid.
