>>592777 >in-depth Look in the /sci/ archives. Every thread on race plays out the same.
>/sci/ users posting >>>/pol/ >/pol/ users becoming outraged and posting social science and making basic terminology mistakes. >/sci/ users calling them retards. >Thread gets deleted a few hundred posts in and then the cycle begins again in a new thread.
>>592809 Yes, yes. You are perfectly representative of the whole board, and the ones who disagree aren't TRUE members of your board. We all know. They're all anti-scientific idiot bigots for holding a different viewpoint, aren't they
Sure, if pointing out that an individual with a flawed layman's understanding of science is formally incorrect about something can be considered having a different viewpoint. Then yes. /sci/ users who have formally studied the topics at hand have a different viewpoint than crossboarders who do not.
/sci/ is a board where mathfags and sciencefags can discuss math and science. It is not a board where crossboarders can go to have their ideas validated by "smart guys".
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.