>mfw brainlets tell me something must be true because of a

Thread replies: 20
Thread images: 4

Anonymous
2017-03-05 03:33:30 Post No. 8723064
[Report] Image search: [Google]

File: mfw.jpg (19KB, 640x356px) Image search: [Google]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:33:30 Post No. 8723064 [Report]

>mfw brainlets tell me something must be true because of a "study" or "statistic"
>"I know it's true because I read it in a study"
>"This book is valid because it contains statistics"
>mfw try to explain the whole host of methodological problems associated with both statistics and studies
>mfw try to explain the many assumptions even scientists and mathematicians make when working with such models
>mfw they don't listen and think they're intelligent because they read something on ncbi and jstor

Tell me you're not one of these cucks, /sci/?

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:36:05 Post No.8723068
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:36:05 Post No.8723068 [Report]

>>8723064
Is that you Mac?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZ2bQq4Hgmg

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:42:56 Post No.8723076
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:42:56 Post No.8723076 [Report]

>>8723068
notanargument

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:43:43 Post No.8723079
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:43:43 Post No.8723079 [Report]

>>8723068
One of the best sequences of the show desu

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:44:30 Post No.8723081
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:44:30 Post No.8723081 [Report]

>>8723076
>>>/pol/

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:45:15 Post No.8723082
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:45:15 Post No.8723082 [Report]

>>8723076
>>>/pol/

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:46:14 Post No.8723084
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:46:14 Post No.8723084 [Report]

>>8723068
OP here.

This is actually a good video and argument against methodological monism.

Thanks for sharing!

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:47:17 Post No.8723086
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:47:17 Post No.8723086 [Report]

I generally take a very skeptical approach towards any study, but especially those with amazing results. You can't believe everything you read and see. Even papers in Nature and Science often contain errors.

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:48:22 Post No.8723088
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:48:22 Post No.8723088 [Report]

>>8723076
>>>/pol/

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:49:34 Post No.8723089
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:49:34 Post No.8723089 [Report]

>>8723084
>methodological monism
you clearly don't understand science as much as you think you do.

Your posts reek of pseudo-intellectualism.

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:50:31 Post No.8723090
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:50:31 Post No.8723090 [Report]

>>8723064
Does ionizing radiation from medical imaging cause cancer?

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:51:08 Post No.8723092
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:51:08 Post No.8723092 [Report]

>>8723064
Yeah yeah induction is shit.
But until you propose a better alternative, i'll stick to it.
And no, "yu cant no nothin" is not a valid alternative.

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:51:18 Post No.8723093
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-03-05 03:51:18 Post No.8723093 [Report]

>>8723089
>you clearly don't understand science as much as you think you do.
>Your posts reek of pseudo-intellectualism.

Reddit post, brainlet.

Read a book!