>>>/qa/668450 >>>/qa/670512 Hiro said that

>>8352021
>3 days ago
Hiro's gone m8
Anyways, /sci/ luckily is one of the better boards on 4chan, probably because most /pol/tards and shitposters don't bother going anywhere near something more advanced than the quadratic formula

???

Can /sci/ mods start deleting uni threads?

>>8352040
Yeah, >>>/out/ and >>>/diy/ are pretty good boards too, but slower than /sci/. The janitors/mods for those other 2 boards are also less tolerant of shitposting or better able to keep up with it due to post speed.

File: 1473630034366.jpg (151KB, 814x545px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 814x545px

The most on topic and serious board is /ic/ and possible /an/

Topics that should be banned:

>EM drive. There's been a thread about this almost every day for months.
>University threads. Science and math isn't a pissing contest.
>Textbook threads. What's the point? It's just another pissing contest and no science or math is discussed.
>Mandela effect. People here are incapable of discussing this without going into a full sperg ragemode. >>>/x/
>Lamest/Coolest scientist, Lamest/Coolest subject, fuck this subject, fuck that subject, I fell for the meme threads are cancer and lead to no math/science discussion.
>"hey guys, X is true! Prove me wrong. Protip: you can't." The proof is the burden of the one making the claim. E.g., the earth is flat, prove me wrong /sci/
>Global warming threads. No real discussion happens and people just parrot their beliefs.

That's just what I have on the top of my head. There may be more.

>>8352105
>>8352052
>thinks uni threads should be deleted
>but "redpill" /pol/ threads asking about 'human subspecies' are fine
cancer

>>8352114
Actually you fucking retard, I just forgot to mention that shit. Notice how I said "there may be more"?
Wow. Almost like not including a topic doesn't imply I support it.

>>8352117
No need to get so defensive unless you're one of the /pol/ shitposters.

>>8352119
Nah, I just don't like retards.

>>8352105
agreed

>>8352021
Okay, I'll start by addressing obvious problems and my take on solutions

>Issue 1: popsci, health and >>>/x/ threads
These will never go away, one of the main points of the board is for people who are not so well versed in science to ask questions and have it answered by STEMtards. The blatant /x/ threads that claim pseudoscience as scientific fact with bait titles are deleted , but more systematic moderation could go a long way to driving them to obscurity

Personally, if the regular shitposters here that know a bit about science could help educate some misguided /x/tard who's on the fence about "wanting to believe" and convert them to the scientific method, or help bring popsci futurologists back to earth, then so be it, I don't see anything wrong with that.

>Issue 2: the /pol/ threads
We all know what this is about, and everyone knows this is the biggest issue this board has at the moment, concerning off-topic threads or pure shitposting/flaming threads that demonstrate surprisingly low quality of discussion, if we can even call it that.

In the last 2 weeks it seems that /pol/ activity spiked in /sci/, including 1 good old raid against the board, with threads on /b/ and /pol/ motivating an attack on /sci/ for being too "libtard". Other threads in the past few days have been spawned or bumped excessively by crossposters from /pol/ threads that called their similarly politically minded individuals to flood the board. While the raid was hammered to death *eventually* by the mods, the latter case got upwards of 500 replies with no mod activity, despite the posts inside essentially degenerating to a board-vs-board war.

Now, a ban on scientific threads on race in general would be too excessive and authoritarian IMO, so my suggestion is to ban the usual racebait threads (pic of an ugly black person or bait question to scientists regarding race and IQ) and allow race threads with scientific news regarding racial genetics and neurobiology.

(1/2)

>>8352134
Having addressed the two biggest problems of the board, let's briefly discuss solutions.

>math & science captcha
I don't think this is a good idea unfortunately. This board has very low traffic as it is, and even from the STEMfag community, not all of them will be willing to solve an equation, no matter how simple, just to contribute to a thread that might be of low/zero scientific value. Only a small percent of the threads on /sci/ are actual science problems/threads, limiting traffic to only these threads and leaving the fate of those threads at the discretion of the posters' mood is very likely to kill this board altogether. It's like adding an additional hurdle to something that doesn't hold enough importance/respect from the posters that use it to begin with. It's the nail on the coffin.

>more punctual and systematic moderation
This is the only realistic solution honestly. It can kill shitposting/off-topic threads effectively without damaging the core of the board. I don't know how they are planning to do it, but increasing moderation and enforcing the agreed-upon rules more effectively is the best possible solution to the problems of not only this board, but the majority of 4chan as well.

(2/2)

>>8352137
You forgot that the mods are lazy cunts

bump. no other complaints?

>>8352539
How about a >>>/popsci/ board that functions as a >>>/trash/ board.

>>8352114

Uni threads just make you guys look like faggots, you all think you're the first to have whatever stupid problems you have and then when you graduate you'll realize how dumb you're all acting

I would be ok with genetics threads if the people in them ever took a stats course

>>8352134
>Now, a ban on scientific threads on race in general would be too excessive and authoritarian IMO, so my suggestion is to ban the usual racebait threads (pic of an ugly black person or bait question to scientists regarding race and IQ) and allow race threads with scientific news regarding racial genetics and neurobiology.

You are conflating different topics here anon.

Back in the day race was a part of biology but as the field of genetics was developed they realized that it was basically garbage and could be replaced by better approaches (e.g. population genetics). Race as it exists now is solely as a social construct within the social sciences. This is social science's attempt to salvage the field because they believe that race is important to social interactions and policy.

So you have

Actual science
>Papers that look at population genetics where different populations are compared and statistically significant information is found showing that one population has a higher probability of carrying a certain gene/mutation.
>Papers that attempt to establish [genome wide] polygenic scores for predicting an objective metric by studying a specific population with respect to that metric (e.g. a genome wide polygenic score established by studying UK students born between 94 and 96 for predicting how long they stayed in school, EduYears).

Social science (i.e. pseudoscience).
>Twin studies
>IQ studies
>Literally everything about race (i.e. any paper that uses physical characteristics instead of genetic characteristics to establish inferences).

Racial genetics isn't really a thing that is taken seriously outside of social science. Essentially it boils down to:
>In social science we have all these shit-tier papers (founded on poorly controlled unreproducible experiments) about how race relates to different things.
>If we argue that we can deduce genetics by looking at race then that will force academia to take us seriously.

(1/2)

give a 2 month ban to people who start the following:
>race threads
>uni threads
>/sci/ won't be able to solve this
>quantum mechanics
>ai
>global warming

>>8352748

In other words, racial genetics is bad social science trying to convince people that it's just as good as rigorous hard science. At best you make all of hard science look shit tier and increase the level of public distrust of science in general, at worst you give social sciences the justification to establish all the social programs they want (e.g. eugenics, social marxism, etc...). This is all ignoring the fact that it's formally impossible to use a clustering algorithm on genetic data to infer the existence of race. You have to not only assume race exists as a scientific concept in order for the argument to be logically sound but you also have to have deduced the number of races and some sample individuals of some races (deduced by some other magical method) in order to make the algorithm run consistently.

tl;dr: Racial genetics is neither scientifically, logically, nor mathematically sound.

All of that aside, I think that /sci/ should just have a rule banning social science and saying that social science belongs on either /pol/, /x/, or /his/ (depending on the type of social science). It wouldn't really affect anything since we never fucking talk about social science on this board except when /pol/esmokers create racebait threads.

>>8352770
>Racial genetics is neither scientifically, logically, nor mathematically sound.
Even though I agree that this type of stuff shouldn't be on /sci/ because the explosion of /pol/ has ruined any chance of serious discussion, you are demonstrably wrong.

>>8352755
Quantum Mechanics and Artificial Intelligence are actual fields of research. The problem isn't with the fields themselves but with popsci cult surrounding them. I think it would be justifiable to ban shit tier quantum mechanics and ai threads under the banner of pop-sci.

I don't think it would be wise to just impose a big ban on them. Also we should make exceptions for big breakthroughs and events, like that Go Match between Google Deepmind and Lee Sedol. We had several threads during each match, and while the matches themselves are pop-sci there were research papers posted and actual good discussion (i.e. it wasn't just a "Elrond Musk says that artificial intelligence is dangerous" thread).

>>8352773
Where at?

Can you provide a method for deducing the precise polygenes that control physical characteristics by looking at physical characteristics? Moreover, can you then use those polygenes to make reliable inferences about the rest of the genome? Can you give a convex analysis theorem proving that a given clustering algorithm will converge to the global maximum?

>>8352795
>I don't understand that all studies that prove causation exist as a result of studies that prove correlation

>>8352807
>bad science often leads to good science, therefore we should consider bad science to be just as good as good science.

>>8352831
You have a low IQ. Proving a correlation is not "bad science".

Do not reply to this post, brainlet.

File: cry me a river.jpg (54KB, 500x358px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x358px

>>8352835
One should know that it is often the case that a third thing resulting in a correlation between two things.

In this case it's obvious that rigorous scientific concepts like populations are likely to result in correlations between junk science like race and other things of interest. There is no need to take race seriously.

File: homology algebra snake lemma.jpg (223KB, 1500x1125px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 1500x1125px

Who else agrees that banning /pol/ users from posting on /sci/ will single handedly solve all of those problems?

>>8352114
this

>>8353156
Deleting /pol/ altogether would fix 4chan.

>>8353249
and where do you think all of the /pol/ people would go once /pol/ is gone

File: 8969.png (235KB, 2877x1745px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 2877x1745px

Hello, is this the race realism thread ?

>>8353261
Trump's Red Guard can go dissolve back into the /b/ they precipitated from, and everything will be made right again.

>>8353261
back to stormfront?

>>8352134
After reading the thread I agree with point two in this post the most heartily, but it should also be recognized /pol has been invading /sci to either troll or garner support for its racial agenda for years now. My view is it's sort of like what Dokowan said in Ninja Scroll about smaller tribes getting smashed in collisions between large clans. It's best to leave /pol and /b but especially the former alone or they'll go a long way to male more trouble for the board. We post here to blow off steam act like retards and brag about autism, which makes it basically a graduate student lounge. Pol and the like are really committed to their premise, they've even been investigated by the southern poverty law center. In other words, they're a lot more committed than us, they believe in a cause. I say just don't kick a hornets nest.

>>8353261
Back to complaining about censorship on reddit

>>8353288
>don't kick a hornet's nest

What's the worst possible outcome? Not like they're going to find any dox. Worst that'll happen is they raid /sci/ for a week or so until the mods get pissed enough to actually delete their board, and that's a victory.

File: 1336008982508.jpg (143KB, 940x690px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 940x690px

>>8353311
The outcome is what happened after /news/ deletion, which requiring the creation of /pol/ in the first place.
/news/ pop was easily a third of /pol/'s population and clout.

I'll let you connect the dots, newfag.

>>8353318
Would you describe yourself as an anxious person?

if you think /pol/ is a problem, you're part of the problem

>do you trust maps?
>>8352442

>This Universe is too fucked up to just pop into existence.
>>8352954

>calling frogs retards
>>8352043

>If extended use of adderall would lower your natural dopamine production, wouldn't smoking weed every day higher your natural dopamine production?
>>8353222

>who the fuck knows what this is
>>8353164

>are brocolies, the sexiest veggiefu?
>>8353137

>gorilla poster
>>8353070

>prove to me that complex numbers aren't arbitrary circlejerking bullshit
>>8343328

>probably /pol/ posts
>>8352756
>>8352817
>>8351000
>>8350536

>various shitposts
>>8352557
>>8353106
>>8352842
>>8351951
>>8352421
>>8352173
>>8351023

>>8353342
Would you describe yourself as an cuck ?

>>8353358
Oh hai /pol/

File: InvSqrt.webm (904KB, 650x950px) Image search: [Google]

904KB, 650x950px

>>8352021
Give us PDF support like /po/ has had since forever.

File: 1452562495080.png (533KB, 3184x2998px)

533KB, 3184x2998px

>>8353372 this please

hiro are you here
pls respond

>>8352040
>something more advanced than the quadratic formula
>quadratic formula
>advanced

I worry for our species Anon; Am I right to?

ban threads about race

there, fixed

File: smugbear.jpg (24KB, 680x383px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 680x383px

>>8353311

Use frog god blessed meme magic to infiltrate /sci/ like a lysogenic virus as they have with /tv/. They already put Canadians in their place, and they'll do the same here if you become a board full of obnoxious leaf clones a.k.a uni thread pissing contestants.

/pol/ did the impossible and took a meme back from normalfags and turned it into a topic of national discussion. A fucking cartoon frog is regarded as a white nationalist threat by the Clinton campaign and media because of them. They're the one board that actually gets shit done.

>>8353288
>I say just don't kick a hornets nest.

Exactly

File: 1440391975324.jpg (16KB, 300x181px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 300x181px

>>8353354
>do you trust maps?

My sides are ready for lift-off......

>are brocolies, the sexiest veggiefu?

and are now exiting the stratosphere.

That's September for you.

So taking a big picture step back at /pol/-/sci/ interaction:

Historically, politics has always sought to exploit science. Because it has the power to lend credibility to any political platform. Pretty much like the Vatican used to- and really, for many of the same reasons. It's the generally trusted authority for shit the average person knows nothing about. That's why half of all clickbait headlines start with "scientists say".

As an example, look at the whole history of Anthropology. Started as a means of justifying British colonial rule, now it's the opposite: Anthro classes are little more than political correctness training. In neither form has it resembled the impartial discipline that it should have been.

Whether /pol/ exists or not, political zealots will *always* come here solely to try to get their opinions validated. It's at a peak now because these are particularly divisive times, but after the election, /pol/ bullshit will become less prevalent than the other cancers of /sci/.

I think we should start talking about the sort of threads we do want to see. That might be more fruitful than listing the myriad things that piss us off.

>>8352105
>ban ban ban ban ban ban
why don't you just go to reddit you fucking retard?

>>8352021
PLEASE UPDATE THE FUCKING STICKY LIKE WE'VE BEEN REQUESTING FOR FUCKING YEARS NOW

>>8352105
>Textbook threads. What's the point?
To discuss science and math fucktard. You are clearly a fanboy if you don't believe that textbook threads are some of the best threads on /sci/.

>>8353544
This. Some of those links in the /sci/ guide are dead. Can't remember which... I think one of them might have been a MATLAB guide.

>>8352105
textbook/university threads wouldn't be a problem if there were only one of them at a time

>>8352105
I would add:
>What is the evolutionary advantage of X?

>>8353597
I'm pretty sure at least a third of these are just John Q.s who are genuinely clueless. Saw a troll thread and mistook it for a legit question.

We should have a sticky explaining how evolution works.

>>8352105

I like things like this, but on /pol/ (sorry ignore me if you hate it) we have a sticky saying that "redpill me on x" threads should be banned but they still get posted all the time

The point I'm trying to make is that you need enforcement or else the policy is pointless

>>8352773
How many times do i have to post this?

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982205002095

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848613000460

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/298/5602/2381.full

http://www.nature.com/index.html?file=/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1455.html

http://www.pnas.org/content/94/9/4516.full

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/14/9/1679.full

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v526/n7571/full/nature15393.html

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tan.12165/abstract

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2271140/

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707610015

It would be nice if homework threads were more consistently, and more quickly, deleted.
Also, I think the sticky should have a sort of FAQ's section. Things like the Monty Hall problem, 0.99999... = 1, and other settled arguments that don't need to be brought up again should each have a link to a single satisfactory explanation so we don't clog up the first page with threads explaining shit to idiots. New visitors should be reminded to check the FAQ's before posting and any threads asking questions that are answered there should be deleted.

>>8353645
This

So, just to change gears a bit. Seems like pretty much every type of thread on /sci/ had been mentioned as something that shouldn't be allowed. Very little has been left.

So what type of threads *should* be allowed? What do you guys want /sci/ to be?

>>8353675

just pure math except for one thread for webms of things happening to metal

>>8353281
>implying
Those retards came from stormfront. They raided /b/ and /new/ during the Hal Turner raids back in 2006 before /b/ day. That said, moot killed /new/ after stormniggers took over the board but they just spread out to the rest of the site.

/pol/ literally exists as a containment board just like /mlp/, and /new/. Really what we should do is start enforcing the containment and ban them from the rest of the site.

>>8353288
>/pol/ is a problem so we should just suck it up and be their bitch.
Fuck you, please kill yourself.

Besides we already kicked that hornet's nest in that 4chan statistics thread where we statistically proved that /pol/ is the most cancerous board on 4chan (moot was in the thread and the next day he turned it into /cuck training/).

>>8353354
Nice try /pol/ but those are obviously all /pol/ threads, you fucking cancer.

>>8353524
>but after the election, /pol/ bullshit will become less prevalent than the other cancers of /sci/.

You must be new here.

/pol/ users will always come here because there will always be users who think they're being really smart by coming down and asking /sci/ to validate their agenda. It's been like this since the birth of /sci/ and it will always be like this unless the mods do more to contain that sort of faggotry.

>>8353544
>>8353550

YOU DO IT YOU DOUBLENIGGER. LITERALLY ANYONE CAN UPDATE THE STICKY.

The problem is that the original creators of the sticky thought they were being clever by using some shit tier "web dev" interface that essentially works like microsoft word. As a result, anyone who wants to update the sticky has to do it in the most tedious ass backwards way possible and as a result NO ONE WANTS TO FUCKING DO IT.

Some other doublenigger created a /sci/ wiki that basically just took a bunch of copypasta and turned it into wiki pages about what books you should read. Some of the pages are well done and other pages are the most retarded list of recommendations you've ever read.

I've been meaning to create a /sci/ textbook review site for a couple years now but I'm insanely overworked with new shit on a daily basis. I know I should just do it but it's a big time investment and it's soul killing when morons like you cry about wanting something fixed with no intention of putting any work into it yourself.

tl;dr: kys yourself

>>8353597
SO MUCH THIS!

File: 1416819370492.jpg (173KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1280x720px

>waa waa why can't I I want to have scientific discussions on fucking 4chan out of all places
You guys are absolutely retarded. You're also part of the problem. If /pol/ or AI threads are such a bad thing, don't reply to them. If they get 100 replies despite yours not being one of them, then maybe people like them and you're the one who doesn't belong here.
And don't pretend like anyone would actually want to discuss "muh high level math" in this place. 90% of you are freshmen or highschoolers to begin with, and any functioning person who's doing a Master or PhD in anything has zero reason to discuss things with a bunch of retarded strangers rather than with his peers.

I can guarantee you that if the mods went full nazi to only allow "quality" content, this board would be dead in a week.

>>8353770
>>8353770 #
Oh. Did not know. Well copy that, I'll make a project out of clearing dead links. Just as soon as I make a fake google account, 'cuz all y'all niggas is shady.

YOU'RE FUCKING WELCOME

>>8353622
Allow me to annotate those links for you. Greentext is direct quote and tl;dr: is a quick rundown.

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html
>Clustering of individuals is correlated with geographic origin or ancestry. These clusters are also correlated with some traditional concepts of race, but the correlations are imperfect because genetic variation tends to be distributed in a continuous, overlapping fashion among populations. Therefore, ancestry, or even race, may in some cases prove useful in the biomedical setting, but direct assessment of disease-related genetic variation will ultimately yield more accurate and beneficial information.
tl;dr: There is some amount of correlation about race and genetics and when you have no better alternative then you may use race as a last resort to try and make some inferences about a piece of data however said inferences aren't guaranteed to be correct and nothing compares to assessing genetic data directly.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982205002095
>The pattern of decrease in genetic diversity along colonisation routes is very smooth and does not provide evidence for major genetic discontinuities that could be interpreted as evidence for human ‘races’
tl;dr: Just some basic results about population genetics and why "race" is a shit tier social science concept.

(cont.)

>>8353812

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848613000460
>Using the two most commonly used biological concepts of race, chimpanzees are indeed subdivided into races but humans are not. Adaptive traits, such as skin color, have frequently been used to define races in humans, but such adaptive traits reflect the underlying environmental factor to which they are adaptive and not overall genetic differentiation, and different adaptive traits define discordant groups. There are no objective criteria for choosing one adaptive trait over another to define race. As a consequence, adaptive traits do not define races in humans. Much of the recent scientific literature on human evolution portrays human populations as separate branches on an evolutionary tree. A tree-like structure among humans has been falsified whenever tested, so this practice is scientifically indefensible. It is also socially irresponsible as these pictorial representations of human evolution have more impact on the general public than nuanced phrases in the text of a scientific paper. Humans have much genetic diversity, but the vast majority of this diversity reflects individual uniqueness and not race.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/298/5602/2381.full
direct link to the paper: https://web.stanford.edu/group/rosenberglab/papers/popstruct.pdf
tl;dr: A paper on population genetics that has nothing to do with race.

http://www.nature.com/index.html?file=/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1455.html
tl;dr: An anthropology paper (social science) that is still using shit tier pre-modern genetics methods like taxonomy on the "hard science" side of their argument.

(cont.)

>>8353816
http://www.pnas.org/content/94/9/4516.full
>It is often taken for granted that the human species is divided in rather homogeneous groups or races, among which biological differences are large. Studies of allele frequencies do not support this view, but they have not been sufficient to rule it out either........Genetic variation remains high even within small population groups. On the average, microsatellite and restriction fragment length polymorphism loci yield identical estimates. Differences among continents represent roughly 1/10 of human molecular diversity, which does not suggest that the racial subdivision of our species reflects any major discontinuity in our genome.
>But what do these results imply for the race concept? Although no consensus has ever been reached on how many races exist in our species, with proposed figures ranging from 3 to 200 (20), in general a species is divided in races when it can be regarded as an essentially discontinuous set of individuals (21). Studies on a limited number of populations, like ours, cannot exclude that there are true discontinuities in the distribution of some genetic markers all over the world. However, only for one of the 109 loci studied was the within-population component of variance less than 50% of the total. If loci showing a discontinuous distribution across continents exist, they have not been observed in this study, and so the burden of the proof is now on the supporters of a biological basis for human racial classification.

(cont.)

>>8353817

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/14/9/1679.full
>Genetic variation in humans is sometimes described as being discontinuous among continents or among groups of individuals, and by some this has been interpreted as genetic support for “races.” A recent study in which >350 microsatellites were studied in a global sample of humans showed that they could be grouped according to their continental origin, and this was widely interpreted as evidence for a discrete distribution of human genetic diversity. Here, we investigate how study design can influence such conclusions. Our results show that when individuals are sampled homogeneously from around the globe, the pattern seen is one of gradients of allele frequencies that extend over the entire world, rather than discrete clusters. Therefore, there is no reason to assume that major genetic discontinuities exist between different continents or “races.”

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v526/n7571/full/nature15393.html
tl;dr: Another paper on population genetics that has nothing to do with race

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tan.12165/abstract
>However, only a minimal fraction of alleles, and a small fraction of combinations of alleles along the chromosome, is restricted to a single geographical region (and even less so to a single population), and diversity between members of the same population is very large. The small genomic differences between populations and the extensive allele sharing across continents explain why historical attempts to identify, once and for good, major biological groups in humans have always failed. Nevertheless, racial categorization is all but gone, especially in clinical studies. We argue that racial labels may not only obscure important differences between patients but also that they have become positively useless now that cheap and reliable methods for genotyping are making it possible to pursue the development of truly personalized medicine.

(cont.)

>>8353819

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2271140/

/pol/ status: TOLD
tl;dr: Points out that race as a biological notion hasn't been taken seriously for a long time but also argues that race as a social construct is similarly harmful and shit tier. Instead the paper explores alternative notions to race.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707610015
>In the past, concepts drawn from genetics have been used—both by geneticists and by individuals outside the field—to justify and perpetuate racial and ethnic discrimination (Kevles 1985; Provine 1986). The belief that racial and ethnic groups have substantial, well-demarcated biological differences and that these differences are important has contributed to many of the great atrocities of the 20th century and continues to shape personal interactions and social institutions (Mosse 1985; Shipler 1997).
tl;dr: Modern geneticists should be wary of these terms (race, ethnicity, etc..).

>>8353770
>The problem is that the original creators of the sticky thought they were being clever by using some shit tier "web dev" interface that essentially works like microsoft word. As a result, anyone who wants to update the sticky has to do it in the most tedious ass backwards way possible and as a result NO ONE WANTS TO FUCKING DO IT.

That's the point you triple nigger. We want to sticky 4chan-science.wikia.com/

>Some other doublenigger created a /sci/ wiki that basically just took a bunch of copypasta and turned it into wiki pages about what books you should read. Some of the pages are well done and other pages are the most retarded list of recommendations you've ever read.

But it's easier to edit and doesn't look like shit. Most of the pages are good summaries of the field.

>>8353451
>>8353768

these desu senpai

>>8353372
I just find pdf threads on tg and post maths and physics textbooks there. Seems to go down well enough.

>>8353440
Only because you're a retarded who can't into reading comprehension.

>>8353156
poor snake

File: 1466883455859.jpg (127KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 960x960px

>>8353846
>That's the point you triple nigger. We want to sticky 4chan-science.wikia.com/
This. It's simply better, both in content and ease of editing. It would be way easier to just migrate what we find useful over from the google site than vice versa, and it would feel more like a real contribution once it's stickied.
>>8353546
Also this. Textbook threads might feel like >muh sekrit club circlejerking, but a good sense for the structure of a particular field/specialized subfield is generally useful and particularly important for productive self-study.

>>8352059
/c/ and /trv/ are also very good

File: feels major at 3 AM.png (25KB, 638x769px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 638x769px

>/sci/ will never be good
>you will never have a good discussion about algebraic geometry on /sci/
>you don't have any friends or even peers to discuss it with either

i need a hiro

>>8353785
>/sci/ can't attract any of the stack or quora crowd by curating itself properly
>/sci/ necessarily has a static community

File: iktf.jpg (30KB, 1024x536px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 1024x536px

>>8354123
>iktf when most subjects I'm interested in are like that

Sometimes I wish I had an 80IQ and loved to talk about fishing/hunting, sports, trucks, and sluts while drinking beer. But no, no one wants to discuss chess variant AI programs, the latest graphene experiments, robotic Lunar/near-Earth asteroid mining, and problems with using LaTeX while drinking homemade wine. Then I get to /sci/, make some threads, and watch them drop off the board while /pol/ and /popsci/ shit keep getting bumped.

File: bots.jpg (285KB, 1349x1488px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 1349x1488px

>>8353785
>/sci/ - Science and Math
>people want to talk about Science and Math
>those people are the problem

You do realize that most /pol/ threads are just reposts from other boards/websites using bots right? Even the posts in them are usually bots. See this image here. There's literally a bot program for just about any shitty subject you can think of.

So, when you see an off topic thread with tons of posts, there's a chance it isn't anything more than a bot talking to itself. I always report and hide the threads. I never post in them.

>>8354158

i would hang out with you irl

>>8352040
>/pol/tards

>It´s a "pol boogeyman" episode

>>8353458
>only board who actually gets shit done
Because spamming comment boxes and programming an spam comment maker is making shit done, right?

Get the hell out of here. Just make us answer a 2nd grade equation; if you fail, you must try 2 minutes later. That's all.

The anxiety of waiting again will make them kill themselves.

Niggas, even /r/science is better than this shithole.

>>8354229
The format of the medium is partly to blame.
I'm a huge believer in anonymity because I've far too often seen matters of substance decided by recourse to "identity" or popularity. You have to contend, though, with a certain loss of accountability - and highly technical, objective topics tend to see the most skewed tradeoffs.

While r/socialism is a fucking joke that can't hold a candle to /leftypol/, for instance.

>>8352086
/ic/ is on topic if you don't spend a lot of time there.

Once you are a true d/ic/k you see the shitposters a lot more clearly.

>>8352021
Can we please not delete every fucking thread that just mentions jews?

If its a thread about how jews should be exterminated, then by all means delete it, but a thread that just contains the word jew in a non-insulting joke or unrelated pic should not be deleted.

that and everyone that then spams >>>/pol/>>>/pol/>>>/pol/>>>/pol/ every time someone says something that hurts their feelings should be banned.

lastly, can we please discuss things like genetics again?

Which one of you was posting the algebraic topology stuff in a /d/ thread?

File: head chop.gif (365KB, 249x187px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 249x187px

>>8353458
>gets shit done
>gets into internet arguments that don't matter to anyone and don't make a difference anywhere.
>said arguments are always about something retarded like something a person on tumblr once said
Your post gave me cancer.

The only board that has ever done anything noteworthy is /b/ and most of that shit was done prior to /b/ day or Hal Turner raids (before Stormfront kiddies knew about 4chan).

>>8354123
I'm holding out for a hero 'til the end of the night.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBwS66EBUcY

File: buttfrustrated.jpg (109KB, 492x600px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 492x600px

>>8354533
>Stop being mean to /pol/!
Cry more.

>>8354537
lol, I've seen some random graduate level homology and category theory stuff in other boards too. No idea who's doing it or what they expect to get out of it but it always makes me chuckle.

>>8354557
>Stop being mean to /pol/!
yes, because spamming >>>/pol/>>>/pol/>>>/pol/ has any effect on pol and doesn't just fuck up this board instead.

>>8354533
>fucking subhumans go back to rdit amirite trumpet wins cuck
>why do you get mad
Because you are the type of poster who bumps gorilla threads and spam the same pseudoscience circlejerk threads everyday.

>>8354579
never done one of those things, but ok.

thats another thing. we should ban any obvious pseudoscience like the EMdrive.

File: 4chan stats board mention.png (46KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1600x1200px

>>8354578
Get over it bitch, every board complains about /pol/ leaking. Mods should enforce it as a containment board as it's obviously what everyone but /pol/ users wants.

>>8354621
im sorry I hurt your feelings, but why would you rather want us to shit up sci with spam than to maybe just hide the post that triggers you?

>>8354592
This meme should also be bannable

File: tumblr_static_monokuma.png (192KB, 400x388px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 400x388px

>>8354207
>>8354538

Pupupupu. As always /sci/ see only what its ego allows it to see. Underestimate /pol/ and you'll get stung. Rightfully so. Too much hubris here and not enough wisdom.

File: 1474050798000.jpg (84KB, 700x512px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 700x512px

>>8354621

Get a load of this faggot.

I'm sick of IQ and global warming threads, but I doubt that they'll never be posted again

>>8354123
Have you tried Stackexchange chat? Or IRC?

>>8354687
>Underestimate /pol/ and you'll get stung. Rightfully so. Too much hubris here and not enough wisdom.

/pol has no power, kid.

File: 8HrKA.jpg (78KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1366x768px

>>8354717

Strength in numbers

File: 1462831007996.jpg (17KB, 262x228px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 262x228px

>>8354621
why is /soc/ talking about /m/?

blabla
Nobody wants pol circlejerk over here
Get the fuck out of here brainlets

>>8354687

It's not hubris but the lack of interconnected echo chambers working in /sci/'s favor that hurts them.

Any power /pol/ has stems from traffic by other sites. Since /sci/'s target "demographic" would be busy with school or work, it's hard to expect sufficient push back without the mods help.

>>8354734
>>8354687
>>8353458
avatarfagging is not only /mlp/ tier cancer but it's already a bannable offence.

>>8354645
>>8354687
>>8354702
triggered

>>8354841
lol, because of ASL posts.

>>8352086
>never been to /po/

File: avatarfagging.jpg (31KB, 680x383px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 680x383px

>>8354882

We have mods? This place is so slow.

>>8352021
Ban people making chem or med threads.

>>8354621
Are you honestly implying people only use one board retard?
/pol/ is one of the biggest boards here, and half of the userbase is also native of several boards. Even if /pol/ didn't exist you still would have the same problem, wait no, it would be worse because now the retards who only use /pol/ would look for another place to stay.

This honestly feels more like newfags wanting to shape this place to their previous site, you have all the tools to ignore content you don't like.

>>8355292
see
>>8354162

File: 1451772337473.gif (239KB, 500x419px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 500x419px

>>8354621
>/g/ gets mentioned by /h/ and /u/ a lot
Robot waifu discussion?

>>8355292
People who are incapable of reading a chart don't belong on /sci/.

kys yourself

>>8355321
Some of the exhentai urls have /g/ in them. That would be my guess.

File: 1474043023483.jpg (5KB, 200x161px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 200x161px

>>8354162
>makes claim against /pol/
>posts pic of /tv/ pedo bot

IM TOO STPUID TO FIGURE OUT HOW DO EMPIRICISM PLEASE TEACH

Level 900 Shitposter here with years of experience.

These controversial subjects should be banned:
>IQ/EQ/im not smart enough/im too smart
>Global warming
>Insecure freshmanisms "my uni is special so i am special and you arent"
>Consciousness/AI/Metaphysical/Philosophical/Death/Voids/Gaia/Flat Earth/Entanglement
>Prove me wrongs
>Big bang/origin of universe
>Elon Musk/SpaceX bashing
>Popsci (numberphile, Tyson, Kaku, etc) bashing
>Program bashing (biology, CS, etc).

>>8355472
>ban ban ban ban ban
There are endless places on the web for you to go experience a hugbox. Why are you here? Serious question.

File: t1O9ht1.gif (2MB, 288x288px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 288x288px

>>8355472

This man. This man right here.

>>8355472
This and also /pol/.

File: divinecomfy.jpg (365KB, 750x725px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 750x725px

>>8355478

No. /pol/ is the light in the darkness. It's loving glow presence is eternal.

>>8355476
Someone ban this shitposter.

>>8355486
lol, the board is actually a legit containment board for newfags and cancer.
gtfo

File: 1473896668217.jpg (153KB, 1090x1087px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1090x1087px

>>8355491
>lol
>gtfo
>doesn't use capitalization

>>8355497
>being this new
gtfo

>>8352021
Climate change denial = Trolling
please mod them

>>8352021 >>8352105 >>8352755 >>8354705 >>8355472

These anons want to turn 4chan into Ledit. As always, they can't win the debate on Global Warming/Climate Change. Especially with the huge body of evidence showing that it is a pseudo-science. So they want to banish unbelievers. This is stereotypical behavior of people who hold to a religious-like dogma and cannot accept criticism.

>>8355515
There are will written, scientifically approached arguments against the theory of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change. Example:
http://folk.uio.no/tomvs/esef/Jaworowski%20CO2%20EIR%202007.pdf

And no, popularity proves nothing. Or do you accept the 83% consensus of Global Cooling?
http://notrickszone.com/2016/09/13/massive-cover-up-exposed-285-papers-from-1960s-80s-reveal-robust-global-cooling-scientific-consensus/

File: 1457252601523_0.jpg (114KB, 557x305px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 557x305px

>>8355573
You dont think it possible to agree that climate change exists and not be a dumbass redditor?

>>8355573
Cool delusion bro

>>8352021
what kind of regulations do you stupid fucks want? how about stop being idiotic whiny newfags and falling for noob trolls? seriously all I see is you retards whining, and that /qa/ board is the cringiest shit on 4chan, it's not even remotely close to 4chan.

>>8352134
if you're a stupid self-important newfag who needs to wear his political views on his sleeve in a fucking science board then you WILL be trolled and you WILL be called a tumblr libtard

>>8353675
The age-old "what will be left???"

Who gives a shit. We will find out when it happens. And I guarantee it will be better than all the shitposts we see now.

>>8353785
Can we permaban this guy? I'm sure it would solve about half the problems /sci/ has.

>>8353440
This is the most retarded post I have seen on this board.

I hope you're embarrassed.

>>8355682
t. newfag who has never actively browsed a blue board.

>>8355682
>board is 80% "noob troll" threads
>we shouldn't be complaining about it

These your threads?

>>8356328
>>8356360
>>8353015
>>8355817
>>8356351
>>8356295

That's not even all the bullshit on page one.

File: Cat Angry Cat 051913.jpg (21KB, 351x336px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 351x336px

>>8355476
>ban unrelated meme topics that are not science or math
>BAWWW HUGBOX!

gb2/b/ kid

>>8354201
/pol/tard detected

File: 1471873275740.jpg (183KB, 893x950px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 893x950px

I came here to shitpost.

>>8354201
>it's a X episode
Take your uninspired carbon copy zeitgeist back to /pol/ you degenerate cum worshiper

>>8352105

Why don't we just ban every post you cockgobbling faggot. If you don't like these threads, don't read or post in them. If theres been a post every day about the same topic, that means there is enormous interest in the topic. This isn't your personal board; it is not going to conform to your inane standards just to suit you.

File: reaction - chuckle.gif (486KB, 300x169px) Image search: [Google]

486KB, 300x169px

>>8356491
>It's not shitposting if it reaches 300 posts.

>>8356369
>mfw all but one of those threads has already been deleted by mods.
Kill yourself, gorillaposter.

you sound insufferable

File: 1473305369894.gif (984KB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

984KB, 400x225px

>>8356721
>You have already reported this post, or someone with your IP has already reported it.

Maybe that thread is "special" for some reason?

>>8352021

what worked for us on /pol/ is flags, that way you can just berate each other based on the country they are posting from instead of pretending you have anything interesting to say

File: light-bulb.jpg (280KB, 1600x1748px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 1600x1748px

>>8357027
Hmmm, maybe an 5 question IQ captcha that displays your IQ for every post you make.

>>8357047
>can't pass the captcha, keep getting under 80 score
>finally get over 80 score (88.9)
>post thread
>get berated by everyone for low IQ

The brainlet rage is palatable.

File: star of pol.jpg (34KB, 390x413px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 390x413px

>>8357027
We should just make all the /pol/ users wear an identifying marker. Maybe something like the /pol/ flag.

>>8357953

Ha all guilty of shitposting will get a jewish star

>>8356491
non of these topics are science related. this board is a joke, probably because academia is a joke, and science is a farce. either you buy a cabin in the forests of n california or oregon and work on math until you perish or you are not deserving of the title "scientist"

>>8355292
they shit post everywhere, they cause problems everywhere they go. What needs to be implemented is a rolling 24 ban on the rest of the site for anyone who posts on /pol/, it would be too cumbersome to keep ressetting modems and most would give up.

>>8353318
The problem is only going to keep getting worse and worse, its best that we just whether the storm for a couple weeks. In the long term its whats best.

>>8353458
>Use frog god blessed meme magic
Like this?
http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/89498215/
http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/89529415/

>>8352157
They don't get paid.

File: 1473957733278.jpg (31KB, 480x547px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 480x547px

>>8354201

/sci/ is one of the better boards on the site, though it still has its issues. Many have been mentioned already; uni threads, social science/meme science, and noticeably less space threads lately. Kind of sad.

Another thing anons are mentioning is /pol/, but that isn't as big of a deal as it might seem. The most obvious negatives are the race bait threads, the IQ bait threads, and replies with no substance and instead just fallacies and personal attacks.

In spite of this, I don't think /pol/ is an issue with /sci/. The typical /pol/ poster that comes to /sci/ to shitpost sticks out like a sore thumb simply from the way they construct their post. These same anons are not very good at logical debates, which is something /sci/ is good at. A well worded and thought out reply can shut down a bait thread quite easily, and those type of replies are common on /sci/.

Simply put, I don't think anything active needs to happen to deal with "/pol/ invasions". They come and shitpost and try to red pill you, but can't form rational arguments. So what happens then? The opposite: /sci/ rubs off, or "red pills", /pol/ using properly structured arguments.

A recent "raid /sci/" thread on /pol/ comes to mind. /sci/ handled it fairly well, and the /pol/ thread descended into chaos as /sci/ logic leaked back to /pol/. New and/or rational anons who were attracted by /pol/ get exposed to /sci/ and realize the difference in board culture, as well as /sci/'s ability to hold a debate without descending into shitflinging.

This last bit (good debates) are actually pretty common on /pol/, they are usually just bogged down in shitpost as per tradition.

In short; more science threads, less uni threads, and pol can't compete with sci, so don't worry about it. Just make sure /sci/ keeps the spirit of the debate.

>>8352021

Same thing people used to talk about on usenet, ban all the undergrads

>>8355476
Go get (You)s on >>>/b/ retard.

>>8355486
>frogtard
>/pol/ shitposts
Gtfo

>>8355573
>majority of academia agrees
>muh vision can't see the evidence!
Cancer
> This is stereotypical behavior of people who hold to a religious-like dogma and cannot accept criticism.
Proof?

Gtfo

>>8352105
>Textbook threads. What's the point?

fucking retard

>>8352105
>>Textbook threads.
They're a total circlejerk but they're useful for people who don't know which books could come next in terms of a subject. Like jumping from analysis to real analysis for example.

Two completely different things that one would need entirely different books for.

stricter moderation of bad threads might deter dumb shitposting. newcomers need to learn the "read 10x more than you post" rule of thumb for forum posting.

university questions aren't bad as long as they are confined to a /general/ or /sqt/. /wsr/ needs to be more realized as a homework help board

>>8352795
>black,whites,Asians look visibly different even a child can tell them apart
>blacks have black kids, whites have white kids, Asians have Asian kids
>clearly hereditary
>somehow not genetic

I'm not sure that anyone actually believes this...

>>8359905
Either illiterate or retarded. Either way, a prefect example of the sort of user we should ban.