/sci/ — Thoughts on Hank Greene

>>16999853 (OP)
Is it him who did the history series or his brother? The books of that one guy are probably passable. I'm fine with him talking about animals.
I don't like their blind lefty ideology, even if I'm certainly rather lefty myself. But they have different axiomatics than me and are dogmatic about it despite being seemingly convinced of themselves that they are super rationale and liberal about their positions. It's an annoying combo.
So overall, not the worst people either. Barring the libcuck self-destructive removed politics.

>>16999853 (OP)
I fucking love science! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItBDepGyfK0&pp=ygUDc212

>>16999853 (OP)
As soon as he talks about anything remotely political, it becomes obnoxiously obvious that he's a ragingly privileged lefty to the point i wish cancer took him

>>16999853 (OP)
Suffers from Trump Derangement Syndrome and Musk Derangement Syndrome.

His words, opinions come through that filter

>>17000068
>oh noes he called demetia don reatrded!

>>17000283
It's more about him being a defender of the establishment that contributes nothing physical to society.
He's never built houses other than improving his own home, it clearly has never done the bins or been a bus driver, he aint no grocer jack.
If he died tomorrow, it wouldn't matter... arguably the world would be better off after dividing up his capital, imagine how much better off the world would be if Jeff bazo died tomorrow instead of sitting on more wealth that he can ever spend.

>>17000283
It means he is anti-science, anti-truth, and merely sees it as an ego affirmation to he sense of self; self worship.

Just like Richard Dawkings who confuses "measurement" with "truth", he is an atheistic death cult priest, not a rational scientist.

File: 23cd44e9-b7cd-412a-adba-018b4da0c98a.png (2.43 MB, 1536x1024)

>>17000314
>anti-science
Hey now, im anti-science. Hank is definitely a science guy, he aligns with the establishment ergo established science.

I on the otherhand i see the flaw & false premises science is built upon so I am anti-science.

Occam's razor & reductionism via the scientific method has lead to absolutionist belief in what scientists produce, yet they are no closer to proving matter or god exsists outside of my imagination.

File: be7ad64c-4223-40df-b448-03b79dbf06e8.png (2.67 MB, 1536x1024)

>>17000314
>anti-truth
He's not anti truth but you must understand that their are 2 sides to every coin, and to people can produce true statements while neither of them being correct.

The problem with hanks politics is that he's views are built from the top downwards instead of being from the bottom up.
We encounter the political version of the erb-paradox since his views come from an ideological perspective instead of a view coming from reality.

>>16999853 (OP)
1984

>>17000337
>he aligns with the establishment ergo established science
Yes, the establishment is anti-science...
>Occam's razor & reductionism via the scientific method has lead to absolutionist belief in what scientists produce
Ontologically incorrect, you are as anti-science as Richard Dawkins or this Greene little boy.
>>17000338
>He's not anti truth
Im not asking, Im informing, and told you why it is a fact with an "established scientist" for reference.
>We encounter the political version of the erb-paradox since his views come from an ideological perspective instead of a view coming from reality.
Like exactly here?
>reductionism via the scientific method
Theyre not using the scientific method at all..thats what makes them "anti-science", not even you know what "science" is or does...youve commit the very act you claim they are.
>>17000314
>Just like Richard Dawkings who confuses "measurement" with "truth", he is an atheistic death cult priest, not a rational scientist.
I EXPLAINED THIS VERY CLEARLY...YOU ARE SEEING YOUR IDEOLOGY BEING SUBVERTED....JUST LIKE DAWKINS.

Put more effort into your shitpost.

File: 18c6ebd0-eaef-4428-a6f5-b5b15a7702e0.png (2.40 MB, 1402x1122)

>>17000396
>the establishment is anti-science.
And just like that, any credibility you had has just disappeared.
>>17000396
>Ontologically incorrect
Empirically correct you dipshit, are you aware of the period known as the enlightenment, where philosophy and science went their own separate ways?
You're just chatting out your arse.
>>17000396
>Im informing
Informing me of your stupid opinion you can not back up
>>17000396
>Theyre not using the scientific method
They are tho, just admit you dont understand science instead of pretending you're smart
They're building the view from the quantum perspective, this is the equivalent to building from the top down.
Are you calling QM anti-science? Fucking dipshit!

File: 5cdd8a91-518b-40a9-8094-0e41877fa7fa.png (2.70 MB, 1536x1024)

>>17000396
>Theyre not using the scientific method at all..thats what makes them "anti-science", not even you know what "science" is or does...youve commit the very act you claim they are.
Ocamm's razor~ the simplest explanation is seen as the correct explanation.
The problem is that established science is becoming as contrived as the anti-science they wish to dispell.

>>17000418
>Are you calling QM anti-science? Fucking dipshit!
Reality is unfaslifiable, so Reality is unscientific

File: 6247c9c0-39f3-484e-950f-12c352d823cf.png (2.09 MB, 1149x1369)

>>17000478
>Reality is unfaslifiable, so Reality is unscientific
You can't prove anything isn't just a hallucination of your imagination, so nothing can be shown to be scientific, which means you shouldn't be using a scientific paradigm in the first place since nothing can be scientific.
What you are really arguing is that reality isn't real, not that science is unscientific...

>>17000478
We could look into metaphysics instead of physics if you dont believe in matter, but i still dont know what you are trying to prove.

Real is not a label that adds anything. Either it's causually consistent or not. If realness doesn't contribute to the causual chain it's a meaningless label and invisible from the inside. Since we're inside, we can never know if we're real or just possible, and the distinction may not really matter.

File: 386xre.jpg (32 KB, 449x462)

>>17000418
>>17000419
Stop sucking your own dick at me you delusional asshat, you dont even know what the words you use mean, youre just "saying things to feel yourself".

midwit thread as always thank you for the schgiggle

>>16999853 (OP)
He's a faggot.
Sceptic and conservative enough in his takes that it's safe to trust him.
But it's not like it'll give you any serious insight either.

File: 82428d8a-d63a-42b0-bf2a-b9cfdb957286.png (2.27 MB, 1122x1402)

>>17000565
Your the one posting pics of you gagging yourself, I'd ask you to stop but the asphyxiation only seems to make you choke yourself harder, hopefully the brain damage won't be too severe when you finally regain consciousness from blacking out on your own cock.

Dirty pleasure cultist

>>16999853 (OP)
nobody cared who he was before he transitioned

>>17000259
all politicians are shitheads.
The more media coverage they get the bigger the shithead.
You defending them means youre a shithead too.

>>17000650
it just means you fell for the propaganda cycle
you think news media coverage isnt political and neutral information you are receiving right? because if you thought otherwise, you'd think the opposite

File: 2025-02-28_04.03.12.jpg (39 KB, 720x720)

>>17000638
>Your
>you
"no u r"
>Dirty pleasure cultist
"no u r"

>>17000396
>YOU ARE SEEING YOUR IDEOLOGY BEING SUBVERTED....JUST LIKE DAWKINS.
NO, YOU ARE.
>>17000314
>atheistic death cult priest,
JUST LIKE DAWKINS.

Im an ascetic Prophet, STOP SUCKING YOUR OWN DICK AND EATING YOUR OWN SHIT.

>>17000068
>cancer took him

rofl

Literally who

>>17000820
A Neil DeGras wigger
On the bright side he wont tell your kids santa isnt real.