Science

[Miles]

There's a growing gap between our technology and wisdom, A quote from Isaac Asimov sums this thought up quite well, “The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.”

 

[Drain Todger]

There's a growing gap between our technology and wisdom, A quote from Isaac Asimov sums this thought up quite well, “The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.”

Actually, the best quote to sum up the situation in which we presently find ourselves comes from Carl Sagan. You probably know the one.

"I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness."

It came true. Many of the biggest companies in the US are R&D, finance, and services. All the manufacturing has been offshored. The elites - possessed of awesome technological powers and being few in number - control almost everything people say online by their influence over all the major platforms, while also spying on everyone and codifying their habits through Big Data and machine learning. The vast majority of people cannot comprehend many of the technical subjects that underpin our society, and are therefore unable to even conceive of why those in power might want to set specific policies; so much for democracy. Everyone is clutching their smartphone oracle, hoping for the stars to align and for their own personal version of reality to somehow manifest itself without any more effort than a few tweets a day to honor their chosen hashtag. Some /x/-tier types even sink to the level of tribal chanting, using their incredibly sophisticated electronic devices to make wishes, believing that they can influence the world by psychic power alone.

"GIVE X YOUR ENERGY! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!"

"I shifted the timelines, bro. Relax."

"Hey guys, wanna buy my orgone energy pyramid?"

These things are all symptoms of a once-great society being transformed into a powerless and disenfranchised class of serfs.

 

[tulskij_tochnyj]

I think phrenology has a really undeserved bad reputation, really. As I understand it amounted to saying that different parts of the brain do different things, a bigger chunk would mean dimples in the skull (like the skull forms around the brain), and so you can read a personality off of that.

The wrong assumption was the part about the brain shape and skull connection, but the underlying assumption that brain parts govern specific functions of thought was 100% correct and basically evolved into neuroscience, just like alchemy evolved into chemistry. Phrenology should be viewed as a forerunner to modern brain science, not some crank thing that got in the way of it.

Cheekbones width (and therefore face length/width ratio) is determined by testosterone levels during childhood and puberty. Testosterone levels correlate with having and openly declaring heterodox views, in-group preference and risk-taking behavior. So there is an argument for phrenology and physiognomy, and also this meme is more than a meme:

Spoiler

 

[shameful existence]

Spoiler: Scientific facts, impossible to argue against

 

[Johan Schmidt]

Spoiler: Scientific facts, impossible to argue against

Ver archivo adjunto 2059205
Ver archivo adjunto 2059228
Ver archivo adjunto 2059231

The 'unreliable husband' looks like a one piece character.

 

[Secret Asshole]

Science, at its core, is not to make human life better. Science is the undertaking of understanding our world and the mechanisms behind it. First and foremost. That's all science really is. An evidence based view of looking at and understanding the world. That's all. After all, every scientific experiment starts with one single event: Observation. We observe something, we hypothesize about it, design an experiment to test that hypothesis, run it, see the results and reach a conclusion.

Science isn't hocus pocus. Its a human endeavor and there really is no such thing as settled science. It makes my eyes roll. The thing is people are always quick to criticize it as having multiple conclusions, saying contradicting things, etc. But that's the problem of science journalists, who will often take studies, misinterpret them completely and then create 'shocking' or 'scary' or 'amazing' headlines with them. People don't realize how much work goes into a paper or developing a hypothesis or how time consuming experimentation is.

Science itself was never designed to create a Utopia (which is sort of a joke, as in Latin it means ' no-place' or 'non-existent'. Science is amoral, in that it isn't good or evil, it just is. The people wielding can do good or bad things with it.

 

[Scalar wave Physicist]

Leftists in America are big on Science!!!

Just like other people in this thread already said, the left only brings up science when it suits their narrative. But that is sadly most of the times nowadays, due to the academia becoming extremely politicised over the last few decades. A lot of modern day scientists (e.g. Dr. Fauci) seem more like showmasters who perform in front of an audience and tell them what they want to hear instead of doing actual research.Also, a rather ironic trend that I have noticed is that science seems to fulfill the role in the mindset of the common person that was formerly occupied by religion. For example, if you question someone about stuff like the definition of gender or the potential risks of the COVID-vaccine, most people will simply tell you to "believe in science" or "trust scientists" without the understanding on the background processes of research, e.g. trial and error, observation, etc. They seem to treat science as this infallible thing which is always right and anyone who does not believe in it is quickly branded a heretic idiot, conspiracy theorist, etc. All of this seems rather frightening.

 

[Secret Asshole]

Just like other people in this thread already said, the left only brings up science when it suits their narrative. But that is sadly most of the times nowadays, due to the academia becoming extremely politicised over the last few decades. A lot of modern day scientists (e.g. Dr. Fauci) seem more like showmasters who perform in front of an audience and tell them what they want to hear instead of doing actual research.Also, a rather ironic trend that I have noticed is that science seems to fulfill the role in the mindset of the common person that was formerly occupied by religion. For example, if you question someone about stuff like the definition of gender or the potential risks of the COVID-vaccine, most people will simply tell you to "believe in science" or "trust scientists" without the understanding on the background processes of research, e.g. trial and error, observation, etc. They seem to treat science as this infallible thing which is always right and anyone who does not believe in it is quickly branded a heretic idiot, conspiracy theorist, etc. All of this seems rather frightening.

I mean, he inadvertently found popularity due to anti-Trump sentiment and he just rolled with it because it meant money. He's going to milk that as long as it lasts. A lot of pop-sci figures (like Black Scientist Man or Dawkins) are far too acerbic and fun killers for my taste. It shouldn't have replaced religion but humanity always needs a belief system, even if people don't realize it. We want things to be ordered. The problem is science changes as our understanding does and science is incredibly complexed and nuanced. Articles that might seem contradictory when brought up by science journalists could actually be fine or not talking about the same thing at all. Modern journalists have done no favors to scientists by painting them in a corner and simultaneously have scientists as super reliable and contradictory at the same time. I mean, this is how science reporting literally works:

Scientists can't really fight that power because its so overwhelming. Nobody in science signed up for being leaders of society. Most want to just stick to their discipline and research or just make some money. It was foisted upon scientists by journalists and its not even real. There's very very few scientists who want to be leaders, its the journalists that make it so. They'll grab the closest PhD sellout and make him say whatever they need to. It isn't the fault of science that this reputation was foisted on it, its the fault of the true cancer and scum of society: Journos.

 

[An Account]

Alcohol is a chemical and chemicals are science so I like science.

 

[No Exit]

I used to love that show as a kid. Fuck you for ruining my nostalgia by showcasing just how cringe that shit was.

I remember finding it hilarious when I saw it 13 or so years ago.
I rewatched it after posting it and feel the same way you do, not sure how anyone outside of retarded children ever found it funny.

 

[Penis Drager]

I remember finding it hilarious when I saw it 13 or so years ago.
I rewatched it after posting it and feel the same way you do, not sure how anyone outside of retarded children ever found it funny.

"Look what I can do"
*flails retardedly*