Skeptics Guide to the Universe Forums

General Discussions => Skepticism / Science Talk => Topic started by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 13, 2014, 04:51:41 PM

Title: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 13, 2014, 04:51:41 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/aDDixHF.gif)
Hyaah!  Hyaah!  Hyaah!


Electronic music video whose practical effects showcase the action of sound-waves on a variety of materials:

CYMATICS: Science Vs. Music - Nigel Stanford (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3oItpVa9fs#ws)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 13, 2014, 04:55:55 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/MmEzCZv.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 13, 2014, 05:25:59 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/5Wx6nZP.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Johnny Slick on December 13, 2014, 09:42:32 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/MmEzCZv.jpg)
(http://wpbusinesstips.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/mailchimp.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 20, 2014, 05:28:36 PM
True-color image of earth from the Japanese weather satellite Himawari-8:

(https://i.imgur.com/o1e9atI.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Johnny Slick on December 20, 2014, 06:54:45 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/MmEzCZv.jpg)
I am 98% mailkimp. :(
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Sawyer on December 20, 2014, 11:21:01 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/MmEzCZv.jpg)
I am 98% mailkimp. :(

I swore I would not buy into any forced meme, but the Mail Kimp cannot be stopped.  Mail Kimp laughs at puny skeptics and their attempts at science.  You WISH you could sort your mailbox with 98% of Mail Kimp's efficiency, don't you?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 24, 2014, 01:46:33 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/z7xFAk5.png)

!!!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 25, 2014, 10:48:40 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/zSDd8QU.gif)
(http://i.imgur.com/zjJ5k.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 29, 2014, 02:31:20 AM
Schlieren Optics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLp_rSBzteI#ws)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schlieren_photography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schlieren_photography)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 29, 2014, 04:04:16 AM
Quake on an oscilloscope (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMli33ornEU#ws)

http://www.lofibucket.com/articles/oscilloscope_quake.html (http://www.lofibucket.com/articles/oscilloscope_quake.html)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on December 29, 2014, 08:52:55 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odJxJRAxdFU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odJxJRAxdFU#ws)

I do not know how to post a video but this is really cool.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 29, 2014, 09:01:07 PM
If you drop the 's' it'll auto-embed the naked link. 
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on December 30, 2014, 09:44:17 AM
If you drop the 's' it'll auto-embed the naked link.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Gerbig on December 30, 2014, 02:51:23 PM
(http://imgur.com/fq8eKUu)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 30, 2014, 02:59:40 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/fq8eKUu.jpg)

Nice!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 01, 2015, 05:37:15 AM
Vela Supernova Remnant:

(http://i.imgur.com/0xfziBxl.jpg)

Full Description & Full Size: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap150101.html (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap150101.html)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: starnado on January 01, 2015, 07:07:55 AM
http://youtu.be/Lt4P6ctf06Q (http://youtu.be/Lt4P6ctf06Q)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 06, 2015, 08:33:18 AM
New lens:

(http://i.imgur.com/lseIWPF.jpg)

Ooh.

Page with full sizes (http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2015/01/image/c/warn/)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 17, 2015, 05:44:40 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/HZH8UqP.png)

I like the 80% who support labels on foods which contain DNA.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 19, 2015, 05:28:59 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/8WLbluq.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on January 19, 2015, 06:54:38 PM
Can we get sources for some of these? I'd really like to know more about them sometimes.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Plastiq on January 20, 2015, 02:23:13 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/8WLbluq.jpg)

My god that's cool.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 23, 2015, 03:21:34 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/pb19t45.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 25, 2015, 09:48:36 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/8q2WH.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 03, 2015, 11:55:04 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/rJXcrPP.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on February 03, 2015, 12:22:32 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/rJXcrPP.png)

And here I thought that was a liberal flavor of stupid.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Pusher Robot on February 03, 2015, 01:24:42 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/rJXcrPP.png)

And here I thought that was a liberal flavor of stupid.

I think the question of "are vaccines wise?" cuts pretty evenly across ideological lines, and tends to cluster in predominantly-liberal areas.  The question of "should vaccines be mandatory?" is a somewhat different question, unless you believe that everything wise should be mandatory.  I ascribe the gap in the answer to that question to the current popularity of anti-regulatory impulses.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on February 03, 2015, 03:41:07 PM
It is not that vaccines should be mandatory because vaccines are wise. It is that vaccines should be mandatory because mandatory vaccines are wise.

I take your point, though.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Johnny Slick on February 03, 2015, 03:43:17 PM
Holy false dilemmas, Batman. I personally don't think *everything* wise should be mandatory, but vaccines sure as hell should be, or at the very least people who choose not to vaccinate their children for non-health related reasons ought to be forced to live with the consequences, such as doctors having the right to refuse service to them or being unable to place themselves or their children in public institutions such as schools.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on February 03, 2015, 09:16:12 PM
Maybe make them live on a special island.

Not to waste a tropical island, though. One of those cold, silty, shitty islands of the northern coasts.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Pusher Robot on February 04, 2015, 12:44:10 AM
Holy false dilemmas, Batman.

What's the false dilemma?  I only said that it's not the same question unless you believe everything wise should be mandatory.

I personally think mandatory generally safe vaccines for dangerous diseases are justifiable, but obviously it depends on the degree of danger.  For a disease that kills or cripples 1 in 100?  No question.  1 in 1000? I think so.  1 in 100,000?  Starts to become a closer call.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Johnny Slick on February 04, 2015, 12:46:48 AM
Buuuuuuuuuuuulllshiiiiiiiiiiiiiit. I just pointed out to you my own viewpoint, which offers a third POV that your false dilemma neglected, literally in the same exact post you quoted part of.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Pusher Robot on February 04, 2015, 12:55:26 AM
Buuuuuuuuuuuulllshiiiiiiiiiiiiiit. I just pointed out to you my own viewpoint, which offers a third POV that your false dilemma neglected, literally in the same exact post you quoted part of.

Just so we're clear, here are the two "poles" I posited:

1. You do believe everything wise should be mandatory.
2. You do not believe everything wise should be mandatory.

How is this a false dilemma?  This is elementary logic.  P and ~P cannot both be true.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Johnny Slick on February 04, 2015, 01:35:32 AM
No, it really didn't. Your poles were:

1. Everything wise should be mandatory.
2. I loev ayn rand soooooooooooooo much

Unfortunately for this dilemma, there are also a great deal of people who do in fact think that some things (such as circumcision) should not be mandatory and other things (such as vaccinations) should be, and that in the particular case of vaccinations it is something that is not only both wide and mandatory but a circumstance wherein the greatest level of wisdom is in fact in the mandatory. You imply that people who think that folks who believe "vaccination is wise" as well as "mandatory vaccination is wise" can also only believe "a stitch in time saves nine is wise, therefore pre-emptive hemming should be mandatory". It is a ridiculous position to take, which is why somebody named a fallacy after it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Pusher Robot on February 04, 2015, 02:19:25 AM
You imply that people who think that folks who believe "vaccination is wise" as well as "mandatory vaccination is wise" can also only believe "a stitch in time saves nine is wise, therefore pre-emptive hemming should be mandatory". It is a ridiculous position to take, which is why somebody named a fallacy after it.

I don't believe I did any such thing.  I only said that only in the case that you believe all wise things should be mandatory is there not even a question of whether any given thing should be mandatory or not, once you determine whether it is wise.  In that case, the question "should it be mandatory" is redundant, because it is always the same as the question "is it wise?"  In all other cases, the question does exist and could be answered by any number of means, none of which I took any position on.

Perhaps I am just not being clear.

(http://i.imgur.com/7q3Phyk.png)

In this case, once you have answered the question, "is it wise?" you have already answered the question "should it be mandatory?"  No further inquiry is required to answer that question, thus we may say that they are the same question.

(http://i.imgur.com/GWQsKlj.png)

In this case, answering the question "is it wise?" is probative but not redundant of the question "should it be mandatory?"  Additional arguments are required to make the case that any specific wise thing should or should not be mandatory.

I hope that helps clarify the issue.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 04, 2015, 02:34:08 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/BZQgGq0.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Johnny Slick on February 04, 2015, 03:05:22 AM
Nice graphs, H. Ross Perwrong, but it doesn't change things. Even in a deductive sense this argument is wrong because it ignores the other variables and in fact begins with a faulty premise. In fact, nobody is saying that "all things that are wise ought to be mandatory"; what people are saying is that the group of people who think that vaccines are wise but should not be mandatory (or made essentially mandatory in the sense of giving people "the choice" to cut themselves off from many aspects of the welfare state while still being forced to pay into it) is so small as to be statistically insignificant. I could put together a graph about this I guess, but it would be stupid and would waste everybody's time, so instead here is a jpeg of a kitten that I found:

(http://sereedmedia.com/srmwp/wp-content/uploads/kitten.jpg)

The point here is not this bullshit that all things that are wise ought to be mandatory, it's that *in the specific instance of vaccines*, what makes them wise also makes them a thing that ought to be mandatory. I would have assumed going into this thread that you already knew these things but since I appear to be speaking to someone with the logical capacity of a 4th grader I will spell this out: in order for vaccines to work properly - that means making the big bad disease they try to prevent go away - a factor that is known as herd immunity must be invoked. Not everybody in society is able to take vaccines. For example, it may shock you to know that even Obamacare does not and will not require infants fresh out of the womb to be vaccinated. In fact, a baby's first vaccinations generally come well after birth. Birth is when a mommy makes a baby come out of her privates. I will not post an image f this because this is called porn. There are other people who also cannot take vaccines, for example people who are very old who were not around when the vaccine first came out (many of them also have a limited lifespan), and other people, cancer patients for example, who have their immune systems compromised. An immune system - nah, that's going to take too long to explain; you're going to need to wikipedia that shit. What herd immunity is, is a state in which so many people are vaccinated against a particular disease, that disease can't find a foothold in the human population and as a result even the very young, the very old, and the immuno-compromised don't contract it.

So thanks to herd immunity, there are essentially 3 different groups of people on this subject:

1. People who think that vaccines are both wise and ought to be mandatory.
2. People who think that vaccines are unwise and of course shouldn't be mandatory because like autism and stuff.
3. People who have the brains of a bag of Doritos.

Doritos are a kind of corn chip sold in American convenience stores which do not generally contain brain matter. Now, you may argue that there is in fact a fourth group of people, people who think that herd immunity is a sham like 9/11. However, you will quickly see that these people are in fact a subset of group #3. Similarly, people who think that vaccines are a smart thing to do because of herd immunity but who don't think that you should actually, like, force people to do stuff they don't want to do might seem like their own group as well, but further reflection should also reveal that these people are holding an opinion that's in direct contradiction to itself and who therefore actually don't really think vaccinations are wise (so they're in group 2) or haven't put the 2.6 seconds of thought required to realize this contradiction (so they're in group 3). There are also those people who think that viruses should rule and humans should drool. I would argue that this group is also not statistically significant but am willing to be convinced by a good study or helpful picture of concentric circles.

In closing, here is a picture of a puppy that thinks vaccines are wise BECAUSE they cause autism, which technically places him into group 1.

(https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/p/4/005/05b/0ad/17ef3d8.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: starnado on February 06, 2015, 03:09:44 PM
(http://i1303.photobucket.com/albums/ag156/rimbaud3000/FB_IMG_1423252729975_zpsz7g9iynx.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: teethering on February 06, 2015, 05:54:30 PM
I found Slick's first graph convincing.  The second graph... not so much.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Johnny Slick on February 06, 2015, 05:59:29 PM
Doggist. ::)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 25, 2015, 12:35:12 PM
Came across some nice graphics:

(http://i.imgur.com/dAOthcy.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/aqS7cK0.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 25, 2015, 05:53:18 PM
One Art:

(http://i.imgur.com/U5OC9ur.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on March 01, 2015, 08:47:24 PM
Nanoinjector action shots:

(http://i.imgur.com/xYhP37O.gif)

(http://i.imgur.com/carePfv.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/rncL5Al.jpg)

 :science:
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Plastiq on March 02, 2015, 01:22:23 PM
That's fucking cool.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on March 06, 2015, 09:45:58 PM
Curiosity drill site reveals gray-blue 'dirt' beneath Mars' oxidized surface:

(http://i.imgur.com/D8Yqcgs.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on March 07, 2015, 12:04:44 PM
That's incredible..
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on March 11, 2015, 12:52:39 AM
I've been watching this in the corner of my monitor and am about half-way through.  It's pretty neat:

The future of lighting is here: OLED (Dietmar Thomas) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxLdSaNPTP8#)

The future of lighting will be very cool!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Plasmodium vivax on March 11, 2015, 01:17:30 AM
Curiosity drill site reveals gray-blue 'dirt' beneath Mars' oxidized surface:

Is that solid rock?  If it was dirt, it would just get blown around to mix with the topsoil, right?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Pusher Robot on March 11, 2015, 02:30:08 AM
The future of lighting will be very cool!

Very much looking forward to getting some of these: http://weburbanist.com/2015/02/17/new-artificial-lighting-tricks-human-brain-into-seeing-sunlight/ (http://weburbanist.com/2015/02/17/new-artificial-lighting-tricks-human-brain-into-seeing-sunlight/)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: flyinjoe on March 11, 2015, 11:49:59 PM
The future of lighting will be very cool!

Very much looking forward to getting some of these: http://weburbanist.com/2015/02/17/new-artificial-lighting-tricks-human-brain-into-seeing-sunlight/ (http://weburbanist.com/2015/02/17/new-artificial-lighting-tricks-human-brain-into-seeing-sunlight/)
Cool! Need these in my basement, where we hang out.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on March 17, 2015, 03:32:48 AM
Push It to The Limit Petman, Atlas Boston Dynamics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJckchby55E#ws)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on March 17, 2015, 07:58:44 PM
Imgur Gallery: Journey into a CPU (http://imgur.com/a/ynPeX)

It's basically money shot after money shot.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Henning on March 17, 2015, 08:32:03 PM
Curiosity drill site reveals gray-blue 'dirt' beneath Mars' oxidized surface:


That's the gooey center!

Yknow, I never quite made the connection until now that "oxidized" in reference to mars surface (and BTW, have scientists always known that it was just the surface?) meant there had to have been oxygen there at some point (Of course, not necessarily air...) But I was just reading now that where the oxygen came from to make mars red is still a mystery... water, quartz crystals, some other slow breaking-down process...?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on March 29, 2015, 10:22:19 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/8WmbJaK.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on April 05, 2015, 04:27:26 PM
From Ok Cupid's blog:

(http://i.imgur.com/GJeuZkg.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on April 17, 2015, 10:51:21 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/jXVYqcf.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on April 18, 2015, 05:38:59 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/yNWWhiy.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 08, 2015, 11:45:04 PM
Apparatus for bovine methane emission capture:

(http://i.imgur.com/ug5WBy4.jpg)

Is Science going too far
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Pusher Robot on May 10, 2015, 01:48:42 AM
I say it's not going too far enough!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: HighPockets on May 11, 2015, 12:06:31 PM
it would be awesome if they made a bag big enough to life the cow off the ground.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on May 11, 2015, 11:11:30 PM
it would be awesome if they made a bag big enough to life the cow off the ground.

Dammit HighPockets! I just saw this thread and was typing "JETPAX FTW!!!" when I read your post. Way to scoop. Gr.

;)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 14, 2015, 08:49:18 AM
The vastness of our universe - or - Why I can't take religion seriously

(Spoilered for length of image)

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 16, 2015, 10:59:39 AM
SpaceX has released art deco Mars travel posters!

(http://i.imgur.com/dFwl8XC.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/6WTK1rE.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/QaPgCzE.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Anders on May 17, 2015, 02:40:02 PM
Picture of the sun's magnetic fields:

(http://31.media.tumblr.com/8f8de54a488acd07e07f139b6c7e7297/tumblr_nodq4t8Uc91rnq3cto8_500.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Anders on May 21, 2015, 08:13:39 AM
Girls with toys (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/05/girls_with_toys_on_twitter_feminist_hashtag_shares_images_of_women_doing.html)

More women with toys in STEM fields than you can shake a slide rule at.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 23, 2015, 06:05:26 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/yjMTQSz.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 24, 2015, 04:34:49 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/NzWGcjn.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 25, 2015, 05:08:28 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaJSexH8LMY
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: mem_somerville on May 25, 2015, 02:54:44 PM
This just came across the twitters--the original NYT story of the indictment of Scopes in 1925. I don't know if the tweet will embed here, but in case not, here's the text:

John T. Scopes is Indicted in Tennessee for Teaching Evolution, this day in 1925. nyti.ms/1doQcLq pic.twitter.com/uOOjocT2tC

https://twitter.com/NYTArchives/status/602868021472944128
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Sordid on May 25, 2015, 07:31:38 PM
Image too big. Just click the damn link. :P

http://i.imgur.com/wdSVxmd.png
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Anders on May 26, 2015, 04:40:39 AM
(https://rnhwholesale.ras.bustores.com/media/catalog/product/s/o/som_ladies_blue_tee.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Vay on May 29, 2015, 11:01:16 AM
This is maybe the most subversive skeptical quote ever, by maybe the smartest skeptic, ever. 

(http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quote-reason-is-and-ought-only-to-be-the-slave-of-the-passions-and-can-never-pretend-to-any-other-david-hume-89382.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Anders on June 05, 2015, 02:15:26 PM
(http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/ggmain/strips/ggmain20081205b.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Anders on June 09, 2015, 10:08:31 AM
(http://new2.fjcdn.com/thumbnails/comments/Isn+t+it+obvious+everyone+knows+that+thunderstorms+were+invented+and+_ac72ad1a6b2823cfd65f70f75c19efb4.jpg)

Benjamin Franklin acquires electricity.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 11, 2015, 09:39:55 AM
Modern chipped credit card:

(http://i.imgur.com/R1ezQc8.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 14, 2015, 09:49:35 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/B5PRarL.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 24, 2015, 08:42:58 AM
NASA locates headquarters of Illuminati on Ceres:

(http://i.imgur.com/q1SMqJH.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 26, 2015, 07:07:12 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/8acpm99.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: jds22 on June 26, 2015, 11:32:47 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/B5PRarL.jpg)

We definitely won in the looks dept.  ;D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 27, 2015, 08:00:03 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoWi10YVmfE
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: kvuo75 on June 27, 2015, 10:23:46 PM
(http://imageshack.com/a/img661/8528/DyGjW7.jpg)


i think its because of fishing.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Anders on July 03, 2015, 09:06:09 AM
I love this clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Fh_liyhIH8
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: starnado on July 03, 2015, 10:14:41 AM
(http://imageshack.com/a/img661/8528/DyGjW7.jpg)


i think its because of fishing.

Or because men blaspheme more frequently?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Henning on July 03, 2015, 01:13:24 PM
(click to show/hide)


i think its because of fishing.

Or because men blaspheme more frequently?

I thought golf immediately, but golf courses are only 3% of lightning deaths. Soccer beats it out! Also, yes: fishing camping boating.
http://io9.com/new-statistics-on-lightning-deaths-in-the-u-s-reveal-w-560760736
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: kvuo75 on July 05, 2015, 03:16:53 PM
 ;D

(http://imageshack.com/a/img537/5921/vhQIUz.jpg)

ive seen one with kelvin too  - dead and dead

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on July 09, 2015, 02:00:56 PM
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hVXlYU91Zds/U8K89I3RPjI/AAAAAAAANrM/WEyKzOb1yXs/s1600/Utah_state_pays_for_Bigfoot_vs_Nazis.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Friendly Angel on July 09, 2015, 02:50:53 PM
;D

(http://imageshack.com/a/img537/5921/vhQIUz.jpg)


One of the biggest problems with Celsius is that they used 100 degrees for boiling instead of 10 degrees... or maybe 1000 would've been OK.  Also, unit of gram is too small for the base unit - a gram should've been the mass of a liter of water, not a mililiter.

We should re-do this.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on July 09, 2015, 07:39:46 PM
(click to show/hide)

One of the biggest problems with Celsius is that they used 100 degrees for boiling instead of 10 degrees... or maybe 1000 would've been OK.  Also, unit of gram is too small for the base unit - a gram should've been the mass of a liter of water, not a mililiter.

We should re-do this.

(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 10, 2015, 11:25:25 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/tI107W9.jpg)

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 11, 2015, 01:05:13 AM
Pluto:
(http://i.imgur.com/71dgASR.jpg)

Suitably excited scientists:
(http://i.imgur.com/bHjr0kY.jpg)


Btw, the preceding post is from Bolivia's Salar de Uyuni, a slightly watery salt flat:

(http://i.imgur.com/NmJx2W6.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/dFr8npX.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 12, 2015, 02:40:58 AM
Gentlemen, Pluto's backside:
(http://i.imgur.com/SrhpvBN.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on July 13, 2015, 10:18:58 AM
Pluto:
(http://i.imgur.com/71dgASR.jpg)


Thank you for showing us this image before it is suppressed. It is fairly obvious that the polygon and complex figures can only be man made and are Masonic symbols.

All joking aside, I didn't know if I would ever know what Pluto really looked like in my lifetime. This is amazing and I am so excited to finally see the lost planet.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 14, 2015, 09:01:32 AM
From NASA's Cassini probe (Imgur (http://imgur.com/a/9QgnT)):

(http://i.imgur.com/IA3PVYnl.jpg)
Pictured: Saturn


(http://i.imgur.com/19rAtCbl.jpg)
Pictured: Prometheus perturbing Saturn's rings


(http://i.imgur.com/MzikJ6H.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/dbpy0yU.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/l3AGTnu.jpg)
Pictured: Enceladus

And more (in album above)!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 14, 2015, 10:08:42 AM
Gentlemen, Pluto (again):

(http://i.imgur.com/z8reN4v.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Anders on July 14, 2015, 10:15:49 AM
Gentlemen, Pluto (again):

(http://i.imgur.com/z8reN4v.png)

But where are the Mi-Go?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on July 14, 2015, 10:27:49 AM
Gentlemen, Pluto (again):

(http://i.imgur.com/z8reN4v.png)

Looks like no place you want to raise your kids.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Friendly Angel on July 14, 2015, 12:12:11 PM
Gentlemen, Pluto (again):

(http://i.imgur.com/z8reN4v.png)

Looks like no place you want to raise your kids.

In fact it's cold as hell.


I feel so privileged to be alive at the right space-time coordinates to witness this.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 19, 2015, 05:11:40 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/PC0Iixb.jpg)

:(
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on July 19, 2015, 05:13:52 PM
Gentlemen, Pluto's backside:

IT DOOOOO!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 21, 2015, 04:21:15 AM
"First image from the Deep Space Climate Observatory Satellite (DSCOVR) 1 million miles from Earth at Lagrange point 1"

(http://i.imgur.com/LP1Y0RC.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on July 21, 2015, 09:24:46 AM
Can someone explain the difference between a Lagrange point and a Trojan point? I always get hung up on that.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: starnado on July 21, 2015, 12:33:07 PM
Can someone explain the difference between a Lagrange point and a Trojan point? I always get hung up on that.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_trojan (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_trojan)

A Lagrange point is a region of gravitational equilibrium. Trojans are asteroids that orbit the sun in a similar orbit to the Earth because they are in or near the Lagrange point. Or something. I think. Read the Wikipedia article. It knows more than I do.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 24, 2015, 09:50:51 PM
Gentlemen, Pluto w/true color data:

(http://i.imgur.com/tOtCIaX.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on July 25, 2015, 01:33:21 AM
Gentlemen, Pluto w/true color data:

(http://i.imgur.com/tOtCIaX.jpg)

Ok ok ok. How the heck did Disney get a team to Pluto to spray-paint half a planet in the shape of the dog?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Belgarath on July 25, 2015, 06:28:15 AM
Gentlemen, Pluto w/true color data:

(http://i.imgur.com/tOtCIaX.jpg)

I think this is false color.  I saw a talk showing this image as 'false color'

Will look later when I can.

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 25, 2015, 06:52:05 AM
I need to stop assuming anything's correctly labeled on the internet.

True color:
Gentlemen, Pluto (again):

(http://i.imgur.com/z8reN4v.png)

False color:
Gentlemen, Pluto w/true color data:

(http://i.imgur.com/tOtCIaX.jpg)

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: DamoET on July 31, 2015, 09:46:24 AM
A couple of my first pics with my new camera from the backyard.

The Southern Cross:
(http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k15/Damlowet/IMG_5197_zpsz60iwh95.jpg) (http://s84.photobucket.com/user/Damlowet/media/IMG_5197_zpsz60iwh95.jpg.html)

The Galactic center un modded:
(http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k15/Damlowet/IMG_5198_zpsfjvgppgr.jpg) (http://s84.photobucket.com/user/Damlowet/media/IMG_5198_zpsfjvgppgr.jpg.html)

The Galactic center tweaked:
(http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k15/Damlowet/IMG_5198.JPGgoodcore_zps2q0xezdp.jpg) (http://s84.photobucket.com/user/Damlowet/media/IMG_5198.JPGgoodcore_zps2q0xezdp.jpg.html)

More Galactic center un modded:
(http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k15/Damlowet/IMG_5199_zpsthjs2ukq.jpg) (http://s84.photobucket.com/user/Damlowet/media/IMG_5199_zpsthjs2ukq.jpg.html)

Damo


Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: D'oh! on August 01, 2015, 03:04:27 AM
Wonderful photos!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on August 05, 2015, 12:07:31 AM
(http://cdn.sheldoncomics.com/strips/main/150804_1438721062.png)

My lobes burst with the desire to make science to you.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: jds22 on August 05, 2015, 03:07:14 PM
This is a cool thought.

(http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BHdtWz9CEAA4gQG.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 07, 2015, 08:27:39 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/CsEM4n2.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 15, 2015, 02:00:33 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/vfFFbll.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Anders on August 15, 2015, 04:07:29 PM
(http://www.italian-renaissance-art.com/images/Raphael-School-of-Athens.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on August 16, 2015, 02:33:02 AM
Right. My art education fails me. What am I looking at here, Anders?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 16, 2015, 02:36:29 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_School_of_Athens
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Henning on August 16, 2015, 03:04:04 AM
One of my favorites.
A who's who of secular classicism. A celebration of intellect in a world run  by mystics.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Plastiq on August 16, 2015, 11:11:58 AM
Right. My art education fails me. What am I looking at here, Anders?

Guns N' Roses album cover, of course.  ;D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Anders on August 16, 2015, 12:37:58 PM
More on this painting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Smd-q44ysoM
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 17, 2015, 05:49:10 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/mvprjqN.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 17, 2015, 06:14:53 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/i1zrqV0.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 17, 2015, 06:38:51 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/CxbrBQe.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: EvilNick on August 17, 2015, 09:40:39 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/CxbrBQe.png)

Love that picture.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: DamoET on August 28, 2015, 09:04:24 PM
Close to topic.
A couple of pics of the Guinness World Record attempt at most people star gazing simultaneously.  21/08/2015


At the ANU oval.
(http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k15/Damlowet/IMG_5228_zpswc17ogpp.jpg) (http://s84.photobucket.com/user/Damlowet/media/IMG_5228_zpswc17ogpp.jpg.html)

Daughter during the 'attempt'.
(http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k15/Damlowet/IMG_5240_zps1k1af1h0.jpg) (http://s84.photobucket.com/user/Damlowet/media/IMG_5240_zps1k1af1h0.jpg.html)

Daughter with the GWR bloke and certificate.
(http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k15/Damlowet/IMG_5245_zps0jvolxsj.jpg) (http://s84.photobucket.com/user/Damlowet/media/IMG_5245_zps0jvolxsj.jpg.html).


Damo
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on August 28, 2015, 10:37:05 PM
I was considering going to that, but I didn't, because reasons.

My brother was there.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 29, 2015, 12:52:07 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/r26CycP.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 02, 2015, 08:59:37 AM
CBS news spot about a vertical farm:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4Xcuz03jog
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: kvuo75 on September 02, 2015, 11:39:39 AM
from twitter

(http://imageshack.com/a/img538/5416/ZNFXcr.jpg)

 ???
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on September 03, 2015, 12:08:40 AM
from twitter

(http://imageshack.com/a/img538/5416/ZNFXcr.jpg)

 ???

The aerodynamics of a cow?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on September 03, 2015, 06:57:01 AM
Why not? It looks like they were probably using the cow model to test out their software for mapping airflow. Notice how the cow has its nose directly into the oncoming wind. Real cows don't do that - they tend to turn their tails to the wind.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on September 03, 2015, 10:16:59 AM
We are working on cow drones.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on September 03, 2015, 10:41:16 AM
Why not? It looks like they were probably using the cow model to test out their software for mapping airflow. Notice how the cow has its nose directly into the oncoming wind. Real cows don't do that - they tend to turn their tails to the wind.

Are you blowing smoke up my cow's ass?   :laugh:
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Anders on September 11, 2015, 09:38:42 AM
(https://31.media.tumblr.com/7824e7be14fed2dfea4d313470021d68/tumblr_n4rq36Ho6J1qdlh1io1_400.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on September 11, 2015, 06:29:15 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/B5PRarL.jpg)
I get that humans aren't as good at hanging around in trees as apes are, but did they really have to just impale her throat on that branch like that?

Can someone explain the difference between a Lagrange point and a Trojan point? I always get hung up on that.
The two Trojan points are among the five Lagrange points.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: UnicornPoop on September 12, 2015, 02:37:57 PM
Can someone explain the difference between a Lagrange point and a Trojan point? I always get hung up on that.
The two Trojan points are among the five Lagrange points.

As I understand it, Trojans are not really the points, but the objects that occupy the two L4 and L5 Lagrange points (leading or lagging a planet by 60 degrees). So whereas we have 5 Lagrange points, we can have thousands of objects occupying those points. I think that's how it goes.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on September 12, 2015, 03:19:23 PM
In astronomy, a trojan is a minor planet or moon that shares an orbit with a planet or larger moon, but does not collide with it because it orbits near one of the two trojan points—the Lagrangian points of stability, L4 and L5—which lie approximately 60° ahead of and behind the larger body, respectively. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_%28astronomy%29)

Trojans are the objects, and they sit near the Trojan points, which is what Redamare was asking about.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: UnicornPoop on September 12, 2015, 04:57:45 PM
In astronomy, a trojan is a minor planet or moon that shares an orbit with a planet or larger moon, but does not collide with it because it orbits near one of the two trojan points—the Lagrangian points of stability, L4 and L5—which lie approximately 60° ahead of and behind the larger body, respectively. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_%28astronomy%29)

Trojans are the objects, and they sit near the Trojan points, which is what Redamare was asking about.

Ahhh...thanks. You're right.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on September 12, 2015, 07:14:51 PM
Guys, guys, guys.

Trojans are condoms.

La Grange is a song by ZZ Top
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on October 26, 2015, 06:27:15 PM
Good job, anti-vaxxers!

(http://i.imgur.com/BGgIyEkl.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: EvilNick on October 27, 2015, 09:19:45 AM
Good job, anti-vaxxers!

(http://i.imgur.com/BGgIyEkl.jpg)

Oh come the fuck on!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 26, 2015, 11:59:39 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/GRom6RA.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 31, 2015, 08:06:23 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/qsIBKgu.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: kvuo75 on December 31, 2015, 10:17:46 PM
lolz
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 07, 2016, 08:05:20 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/F8SEtTO.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: mindme on January 07, 2016, 10:09:20 AM
My alt med/kpop parody:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m28DJWlixFo
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Sordid on January 09, 2016, 06:57:43 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/AReqgfP.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 17, 2016, 08:24:40 AM
(https://40.media.tumblr.com/ed92237fdb5c70386ed9a1cb37e8cad5/tumblr_o0rf3r5qEx1r8x2ybo1_540.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 31, 2016, 01:04:40 AM
The Moon in True-Color™ courtesy of the Chinese:

(http://i.imgur.com/9dfK0pK.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 31, 2016, 11:27:43 AM
Backside of the moon courtesy of NASA:

(http://i.imgur.com/hHNIP9p.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on January 31, 2016, 12:03:02 PM
Backside of the moon
You could have captioned this, "Mooned by the Moon", but you didn't. For that I will never forgive you.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 31, 2016, 01:08:44 PM
Continent for scale:

(http://i.imgur.com/5gh9l7O.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on January 31, 2016, 03:42:50 PM
Well no wonder it was so windy today.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 12, 2016, 10:48:40 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWqhUANNFXw
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: DamoET on February 12, 2016, 07:08:07 PM
That Chinese moon pic is clearly a fake!  Where are the stars in the night sky?   ;)

Seriously though, the rock looks like granite.


Damo
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 16, 2016, 05:35:19 PM
700 fps .gif of eye (https://gfycat.com/PlayfulEachIsopod). 

Spoiler: The iris jiggles.  (http://i.imgur.com/ogqKbu5.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 19, 2016, 10:11:55 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/XYMgRMk.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on February 19, 2016, 10:25:00 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/XYMgRMk.jpg)

That just makes me sad.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Boßel on February 19, 2016, 10:35:43 AM
Gross parents. What a sad childhood.

 When I volunteered at the local Natural History Museum I encountered some people who didn't "believe" in evolution, but no kid ever had a problem with dinosaurs.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Henning on February 19, 2016, 09:11:14 PM
What school gets color-copy worksheets??
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 20, 2016, 11:26:14 PM
Earth from the ISS: https://gfycat.com/WelldocumentedWindyAlbacoretuna

This is the most POV-like POV I've seen.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 21, 2016, 02:07:02 PM
This is freaking me out a little:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXVspNUeiWw

Imagine what DARPA, etc. must have?  How soon until video won't cut it as evidence?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 22, 2016, 01:51:48 PM
Yeah, that's pretty creepy.

It's not perfect, but it's impressive.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on March 25, 2016, 09:11:12 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/FGPcio0.jpg)

(^^^EM Drive)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bimble on May 09, 2016, 11:09:13 AM
The clouds were just light enough for me to grab a photo of the transit of Mercury this afternoon :) (the dot at 9 o'clock)

(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7245/26880066126_e8e6e00451_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GXinaY)Transit of Mercury (https://flic.kr/p/GXinaY) by Bimble (https://www.flickr.com/photos/bimbling_along/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 15, 2016, 07:06:13 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/rYxJMew.gif)

Quote
...

Dr Ed Hawkins, a climate scientist at the Department of Meteorology at the University of Reading who created the visualisation, told MailOnline: 'I wanted to try to visualise the global changes we have seen in different ways to learn about how we might improve our communication.

'The pace of change is immediately obvious, especially over the past few decades, and the relationship between current global temperatures and the internationally discussed limits are also clear.'

Within the animation it is also possible to see how global events such as the El Nino phenomenon alter temperatures around the world.

For example, there is a small amount of cooling between the 1880s and 1910 due to volcanic eruptions before warming again between 1910 and the 1940s.

Dr Hawkins said this warming was due to a small increase in solar output and natural variability and recovery from the volcanic eruptions.

Temperatures also remain largely flat between the 1950s and the 1970s, he explained in his blog, because aerosols released into the atmosphere mask the impact of greenhouse gases.

But from 1980 there is strong warming with temperatures pushed particularly high in 1998 and 2016 due to strong El Nino events.

...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3587124/Climate-change-summed-one-animation-Gif-shows-world-warmed-past-76-years.html
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on May 16, 2016, 10:09:26 PM
"Here's your handbasket."

#TheFarSide
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 06, 2016, 04:39:09 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vj1G9gqhkYA
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on November 10, 2016, 10:39:08 AM
(https://scontent-gru2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14732353_10206005102886333_1461714311350482975_n.jpg?oh=512f94816829e91c5aaafe5a8894b379&oe=58C5B423)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 12, 2016, 07:12:55 PM
(https://i.redd.it/j26s8sm207xx.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Henning on November 18, 2016, 01:16:59 PM
Been trying to vet that graph before I post it on FB... ^
The NSIDC is neither confirming nor denying nor caveat-ing yet...
http://www.theverge.com/2016/11/17/13667630/global-sea-ice-concentration-graph-science-twitter
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 21, 2016, 09:26:41 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSaLDI4bE7M
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 01, 2016, 12:02:03 AM
Scientist describing a possible positive-feedback loop in carbon emissions/warming via ↑warming to ↑soil emissions to ↑↑warming to ↑↑soil emissions and so on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrKOpPJIbXA
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 10, 2016, 03:03:34 AM
Smattering of fun stats about [see title]:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANUoAdXfA60
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 10, 2016, 03:58:56 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/BUHzLqO.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 16, 2016, 09:59:19 PM
More than half of 2016 constituted historic daily lows in Arctic sea-ice extent:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Czz3L1sUQAQfb0f.jpg)

Edit:

I've read that:At this point, a 'Climate_Change.jpg' thread implicitly about panic and live-blogging the end of the world would probably be sustainable
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 31, 2016, 07:01:26 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/EbOGgifl.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on January 02, 2017, 01:16:41 PM
(https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/hphotos-xpf1/t51.2885-15/e15/10706759_682736291833956_238499483_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 04, 2017, 09:03:43 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/K0l77Sb.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on January 05, 2017, 09:45:03 AM
reminder for me to post something later.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 08, 2017, 02:43:56 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/rWJEFDI.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on January 08, 2017, 12:59:57 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/UPpdJmS.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/ukMZ3sV.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on January 09, 2017, 01:14:37 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/EbOGgifl.jpg)

What is that a picture of?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on January 09, 2017, 01:16:59 PM
I am guessing that it is God Emperor of Dune.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on January 09, 2017, 01:21:18 PM
Not a preventable disease at all. It is a Hydrothermal worm.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on January 09, 2017, 08:53:23 PM
Molten salt in water.

(https://giant.gfycat.com/RegularUnequaledDungenesscrab.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on January 10, 2017, 11:25:45 AM
Molten salt in water.

(https://giant.gfycat.com/RegularUnequaledDungenesscrab.gif)

Is that from the quick and massive release of steam or a chemical reaction due to the sodium?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on January 10, 2017, 11:44:14 AM
It's just thermal.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on January 10, 2017, 11:49:54 AM
It's just thermal.

What's causing the delay there? It sits in the water for about a second, with nothing happening, and suddenly WHOOMPH!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on January 10, 2017, 11:54:15 AM
It's just thermal.

What's causing the delay there? It sits in the water for about a second, with nothing happening, and suddenly WHOOMPH!

that's 5000 frames per second. "Time is an illusion. Lunch time doubly so."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on January 10, 2017, 12:14:57 PM
It's just thermal.

What's causing the delay there? It sits in the water for about a second, with nothing happening, and suddenly WHOOMPH!

that's 5000 frames per second. "Time is an illusion. Lunch time doubly so."

Found the original:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDRWQUUUCF0
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on January 10, 2017, 01:12:36 PM
It's just thermal.

What's causing the delay there? It sits in the water for about a second, with nothing happening, and suddenly WHOOMPH!

that's 5000 frames per second. "Time is an illusion. Lunch time doubly so."
We can see when the video slows down. That still doesn't explain why it falls into the water a ways before exploding.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Pusher Robot on January 10, 2017, 01:27:37 PM
Probably the Leidenfrost Effect. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leidenfrost_effect)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on January 10, 2017, 01:42:56 PM
So pouring molten [anything else] into water would have the same explosive result?

No, I think there's a chemical reaction going on.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on January 10, 2017, 01:49:23 PM
So pouring molten [anything else] into water would have the same explosive result?

No, I think there's a chemical reaction going on.

Watch the original video I posted above (http://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,43247.msg9470889.html#msg9470889); he compares the reaction of sodium to this explosion, and they're very different. He concludes that it's a physical reaction, with water entering an indentation in the salt, becoming superheated, expanding and driving the salt bubble outwards, getting it into contact with more water, and so on.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on January 10, 2017, 07:33:08 PM
So pouring molten [anything else] into water would have the same explosive result?

False. This ignores issues like capacitance, conductivity, and surface area. You can walk on hot coals without injury, but don't try it on a hibachi.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on January 11, 2017, 02:30:16 AM
The sodium wouldn't react with the water because it's chemically bonded to the chlorine. Even heating it to molten won't demolecularise the salt.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on January 11, 2017, 07:09:09 AM
The sodium wouldn't react with the water because it's chemically bonded to the chlorine. Even heating it to molten won't demolecularise the salt.

It's not a molecular compound though, but an ionic one... What happens to the ionic bonds when you melt an ionic compound? I assume they must be broken for the lattice structure to give out.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 11, 2017, 07:18:12 AM
Yeah, salts are ionically bonded compounds subject to dissociation in solution/water.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on January 12, 2017, 12:24:17 AM
Yes, salt is ionic, but it doesn't have the reaction you get with water and pure sodium. Sodium ions in solution with complimentary chlorine ions don't react that way just because you apply heat before you dissolve them.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on January 12, 2017, 03:38:42 AM
To be fair, I know little more than high school level chemistry.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 12, 2017, 04:22:36 AM
Yeah, I doubt that's enough heat to make a difference. 

The difference is that sodium reacts out like:

Na + H2O -> Na+ + OH- + H2

Whereas the sodium in sodium chloride is already an Na+ so the water molecules just get in there and separate the two and they all benignly float around.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on January 12, 2017, 06:43:51 AM
Yeah, that.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on January 12, 2017, 06:52:26 AM
it would be awesome if they made a bag big enough to life the cow off the ground.
I would immediately invest in car wash company stock.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Belgarath on January 12, 2017, 01:12:23 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170112/37cbd497ba88d056a2ae6c01dba2eaab.jpg)

I'm skeptical. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 12, 2017, 01:41:31 PM
Huh, [H2]-infused water.  I'll have to see if there's any good studies on this later. 

Quote
HFACTOR infuses pure hydrogen into water via patent-pending natural methods, unlike other hydrogen products which are manufactured utilizing magnesium and chemical processes.

https://h-factor.com/faq/
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on January 12, 2017, 02:06:53 PM
"That's no space station, It's a small moon."

(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1701/PIA20515MimasMountain1020.jpg)

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap170111.html
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Ah.hell on January 12, 2017, 02:07:12 PM
Wait, what's extra hydrogen suppose to do for you?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Belgarath on January 12, 2017, 03:20:34 PM
Wait, what's extra hydrogen suppose to do for you?

Very good question


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on January 12, 2017, 03:23:20 PM
Wait, what's extra hydrogen suppose to do for you?

Very good question


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bind to the harmful oxidizers in your body to create more hydrating water.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on January 12, 2017, 04:15:38 PM
It's just thermal.

What's causing the delay there? It sits in the water for about a second, with nothing happening, and suddenly WHOOMPH!

that's 5000 frames per second. "Time is an illusion. Lunch time doubly so."

Found the original:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDRWQUUUCF0

Compare:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEC64Bqeajs
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on January 12, 2017, 04:37:10 PM
Compare what? It's the same video.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on January 12, 2017, 04:43:58 PM
Compare what? It's the same video.
Oops, sorry about that. I went back and fixed it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on January 12, 2017, 04:58:08 PM
Wait, what's extra hydrogen suppose to do for you?

Hydrate you of course. Duh. It's like, in the name, and stuff.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on January 26, 2017, 02:03:36 PM
(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1701/ab_moon_from_geo_orbit_med_res_jan_15_2017.jpg)

What a nice image!
 Moon over Planet Earth  (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)
Explanation: Launched last November 19 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, the satellite now known as GOES-16 can now observe planet Earth from a geostationary orbit 22,300 miles above the equator. Its Advanced Baseline Imager captured this contrasting view of Earth and a gibbous Moon on January 15. The stark and airless Moon is not really the focus of GOES-16, though. Capable of providing a high resolution full disk image of Earth every 15 minutes in 16 spectral channels, the new generation satellite's instrumentation is geared to provide sharper, more detailed views of Earth's dynamic weather systems and enable more accurate weather forecasting. Like previous GOES weather satellites, GOES-16 will use the moon over our fair planet as a calibration target.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Andrew Clunn on January 26, 2017, 02:08:51 PM
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603502/two-infants-treated-with-universal-immune-cells-have-their-cancer-vanish/ (https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603502/two-infants-treated-with-universal-immune-cells-have-their-cancer-vanish/)

Fuck yeah.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 29, 2017, 11:22:52 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/CX57yWF.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on January 29, 2017, 12:50:41 PM
Well... some crystals really do have some energy in it... they are called.. Piezoeletric. Apart from that.... yeah, they dont do shit (except enrich the exoteric pseudoscience shop owners). lol
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on January 29, 2017, 01:36:06 PM
Yer usin' them wrong. Note the shape. It's obvious where they go.  ;D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Nemmzy on January 29, 2017, 08:39:19 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/CX57yWF.jpg)

Too be fair they do make lovely jewelry. I like shiny rocks! ;)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on January 31, 2017, 08:19:38 PM
(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1701/EclipseClouds_MODISanderson_1415.jpg)

 Where to see the American Eclipse  (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on January 31, 2017, 09:23:42 PM
Max time of eclipse, Paducah, Kentucky.  Book now, the motel will fill up quickly.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 01, 2017, 01:06:18 AM
(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1701/EclipseClouds_MODISanderson_1415.jpg)

 Where to see the American Eclipse  (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on February 02, 2017, 11:10:39 AM
She is great!

https://weather.com/news/news/breitbart-misleads-americans-climate-change?cm_ven=FB_SCI_JK_120616_4 (https://weather.com/news/news/breitbart-misleads-americans-climate-change?cm_ven=FB_SCI_JK_120616_4)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Ah.hell on February 02, 2017, 11:20:03 AM
(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1701/EclipseClouds_MODISanderson_1415.jpg)

 Where to see the American Eclipse  (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)

(click to show/hide)
My wife's uncle is renting a cabin in the zone, we plan on spending the weekend with them for it. 
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 02, 2017, 11:47:32 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/tQoqKWS.jpg)

SEEMS LEGIT.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on February 02, 2017, 12:58:57 PM
I was just thinking this morning..."Huh, I wonder how they make non-organic tea."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Johnny Slick on February 02, 2017, 12:59:42 PM
Put lead flakes in water? I mean, it'll make your complexion nice and pale, and after a while you won't really care about how it tastes...
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: HighPockets on February 02, 2017, 06:20:49 PM
Kilauea spewing lava into the ocean.

https://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/multimedia/uploads/multimediaFile-1623.mp4
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 02, 2017, 08:52:04 PM
I was just thinking this morning..."Huh, I wonder how they make non-organic tea."
They use pianos.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Billzbub on February 03, 2017, 09:31:58 AM
Sexy AF:

(http://hbz.h-cdn.co/assets/17/05/980x490/landscape-1485895883-hbz-bill-buzz-index.jpg)

Bill Nye and Buzz Aldrin on NY Fashion Week runway
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 04, 2017, 11:26:20 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gif)
https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv

ETFix gifv to gif
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 05, 2017, 07:33:15 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv)
https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv
I wish I could think of some biting comment to post...
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on February 05, 2017, 09:07:45 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv)
https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv
I wish I could think of some biting comment to post...

You'll be long in the tooth before anything comes to you.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 05, 2017, 12:40:39 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv)
https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv
I wish I could think of some biting comment to post...

You'll be long in the tooth before anything comes to you.
Fangs for the sharky reply.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Boßel on February 05, 2017, 01:03:57 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv)
https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv
I wish I could think of some biting comment to post...

You'll be long in the tooth before anything comes to you.
Fangs for the sharky reply.

I'm trying to find the wisdom in these posts.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 05, 2017, 01:15:28 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv)
https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv
I wish I could think of some biting comment to post...

You'll be long in the tooth before anything comes to you.
Fangs for the sharky reply.

I'm trying to find the wisdom in these posts.
You should hire a retainer to work that out for you.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 05, 2017, 01:42:33 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv)
https://i.imgur.com/o1490ps.gifv
I wish I could think of some biting comment to post...

You'll be long in the tooth before anything comes to you.
Fangs for the sharky reply.

I'm trying to find the wisdom in these posts.
You should hire a retainer to work that out for you.

(click to show/hide)

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 05, 2017, 04:38:39 PM
This thread is practically transcend dental.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Gerbig on February 05, 2017, 07:15:55 PM
This thread is practically transcend dental.

Can I join the pun parade or should I bite my tongue?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 05, 2017, 11:16:38 PM
This thread is practically transcend dental.

Can I join the pun parade or should I bite my tongue?

Keep a stiff upper lip and champ on!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Nemmzy on February 08, 2017, 09:39:30 PM
(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1701/EclipseClouds_MODISanderson_1415.jpg)

 Where to see the American Eclipse  (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)

(click to show/hide)
My wife's uncle is renting a cabin in the zone, we plan on spending the weekend with them for it.

We just booked our VRBO.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 09, 2017, 07:32:01 AM
"Brace yourselves, eclipse coming."

And then he dies.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on February 10, 2017, 02:22:33 PM
(https://cdn.theconversation.com/files/156104/width754/image-20170208-17349-193kp0t.jpg)

Quote
Every movement that has rejected a scientific consensus, whether it be on evolution, climate change or the link between smoking and cancer, exhibits the same five characteristics of science denial (concisely summarized by the acronym FLICC). These are fake experts, logical fallacies, impossible expectations, cherry picking and conspiracy theories. When someone wants to cast doubt on a scientific finding, FLICC is an integral part of the misinformation toolbox.
What do gorilla suits and blowfish fallacies have to do with climate change?
https://skepticalscience.com/gorilla-suits-and-blowfish-fallacies.html
 
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Billzbub on February 14, 2017, 10:56:49 AM
Quote
Every movement that has rejected a scientific consensus, whether it be on evolution, climate change or the link between smoking and cancer, exhibits the same five characteristics of science denial (concisely summarized by the acronym FLICC). These are fake experts, logical fallacies, impossible expectations, cherry picking and conspiracy theories. When someone wants to cast doubt on a scientific finding, FLICC is an integral part of the misinformation toolbox.
What do gorilla suits and blowfish fallacies have to do with climate change?
https://skepticalscience.com/gorilla-suits-and-blowfish-fallacies.html

That was a very good article, thanks.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: lonely moa on February 16, 2017, 10:35:10 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/UqrwHFH.jpg)

Not all that sciency, but this panel runs a fist sized pump that pumps (in good sun) 20L/min 400m horizontally and 12m vertically.  A mains powered sutup was going to cost $11,000 and about $50/mo... this was $1,000 and $0/month.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 17, 2017, 10:47:59 PM
(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/223/603/a12.jpg)

He done been skeptimathized.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 20, 2017, 06:20:35 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/fNPdJia.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 22, 2017, 07:18:44 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/UI2NNFV.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 23, 2017, 10:33:49 AM
It's suspected that the President watches Infowars and talks to Alex Jones.

This is Alex Jones.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Km5UVbP2Fs

"How did the pedophiles get an AI?"
- Joe Rogan, to Alex Jones
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: ProgrammingGodJordan on February 23, 2017, 10:46:43 AM
(https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*jLYR8P33NtXUEmon2AF2IA.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on February 23, 2017, 10:54:23 AM
That's...not how the uncertainty principle works
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Friendly Angel on February 23, 2017, 11:52:21 AM
That's...not how the uncertainty principle works

Traffic Cop:  So, Mr. Heisenberg, do you know how fast you were driving?
Werner:  I know EXACTLY how fast I was going, but I have NO IDEA where I am!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 23, 2017, 12:17:16 PM
That's...not how the uncertainty principle works
Yeah, it properly reads "Am I going to get laid tonight?"
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 23, 2017, 01:32:44 PM
It's suspected that the President watches Infowars and talks to Alex Jones.

This is Alex Jones.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Km5UVbP2Fs

"How did the pedophiles get an AI?"
- Joe Rogan, to Alex Jones

(https://pic60.picturetrail.com/VOL1697/8702320/23451851/408476393.jpg)

I've seen some of Alex Jones before but.... damn.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on February 23, 2017, 02:13:14 PM
That's...not how the uncertainty principle works
Yeah, it properly reads "Am I going to get laid tonight?"

...and the answers "Yes I am going to get laid tonight" and "No, I won't get laid tonight" are both true.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Johnny Slick on February 23, 2017, 03:52:13 PM
That's Schroedinger's Cat, not the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The HUP states that, essentially, it is impossible to know, for very small objects (like subatomic particle levels of smallness), exactly where the object at the time of detection *and* its speed. There are ways you can figure out either one individually but not both at the same time.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on February 23, 2017, 05:11:13 PM
That's Schroedinger's Cat, not the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The HUP states that, essentially, it is impossible to know, for very small objects (like subatomic particle levels of smallness), exactly where the object at the time of detection *and* its speed. There are ways you can figure out either one individually but not both at the same time.


That's Schroedinger's Cat and the Uncertainty Principle.

If you try to see whether or not you will get laid tonight, that will have an effect on whether or not you will get laid tonight.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 27, 2017, 11:29:27 PM
That's Schroedinger's Cat, not the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The HUP states that, essentially, it is impossible to know, for very small objects (like subatomic particle levels of smallness), exactly where the object at the time of detection *and* its speed. There are ways you can figure out either one individually but not both at the same time.


That's Schroedinger's Cat and the Uncertainty Principle.

If you try to see whether or not you will get laid tonight, that will have an effect on whether or not you will get laid tonight.

There are other paired properties that are collectively indeterminate. From the Complementarity (physics) page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarity_(physics)) of Wikipedia:


I would personally add
but I might be a bitter sod.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on February 28, 2017, 12:35:08 AM
There is all the observer effect, where actually observing something changes its nature.

Sometimes it seems there's more uncertainty than certainty.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Billzbub on February 28, 2017, 10:58:56 AM
There is all the observer effect, where actually observing something changes its nature.

Sometimes it seems there's more uncertainty than certainty.

I don't know about that.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on February 28, 2017, 11:23:20 AM
There is also the observer effect, where actually observing something changes its nature.

Sometimes it seems there's more uncertainty than certainty.

I don't know about that.

Well, I'm not certain.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on February 28, 2017, 01:27:44 PM
There is all the observer effect, where actually observing something changes its nature.
The idea that a particle has an exact momentum and position and we just can't pin down one without messing up the other is a common misconception.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on February 28, 2017, 01:49:58 PM
There is all the observer effect, where actually observing something changes its nature.
The idea that a particle has an exact momentum and position and we just can't pin down one without messing up the other is a common misconception.

I think the idea is that we can know a sub-atomic particle's position or it's momentum, but if we know one we can't know the other. You think that's a misconception?

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on February 28, 2017, 02:05:02 PM
Estockly is correct. That is not a misconception, but is almost certainly the fact of the matter.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on February 28, 2017, 08:00:36 PM
I think it is more subtle than that.  There is a certain amount of uncertainty inherant between position and momentum.  A threshold beyond which you can not drop, represented by the plahnk constant.  The more sure you become about one of these variables, the more of that uncertainty gets forced onto the other variable.

Conservation of uncertainty.   ;D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on February 28, 2017, 08:30:48 PM
There is all the observer effect, where actually observing something changes its nature.
The idea that a particle has an exact momentum and position and we just can't pin down one without messing up the other is a common misconception.

I think the idea is that we can know a sub-atomic particle's position or it's momentum, but if we know one we can't know the other. You think that's a misconception?
The misconception is that a particle has an exact momentum and position. Which is why I said that.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on February 28, 2017, 08:58:11 PM
Imagine you want to use a laser beam to clock the speed of a car.

On the scale of a car, there is no problem identifying both it's speed and it's position. This is because the effect of the photons on the car is trivial.

Now, imagine that the only way to measure the speed of a car was to slam an identical car into it at speed and measure the properties of that car's rebound.

This is the problem we run into when we try to measure tiny particles like photons and electrons. The smallest thing we have to measure it with is another photon. The impact of the particles changes things.

Despite what Jeff Goldblum might tell you, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle had no applicability to dinosaurs on Isla Sorna.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on March 01, 2017, 12:04:41 AM
What position do you think you're arguing against?

I never said that actively measuring subatomic things doesn't have an effect on them.

I just pointed out that there's a common misconception that this is the only reason we can't pin down position and momentum at the same time. The misconception is that a particle has an exact momentum and position. I keep repeating that because I don't know how to say it more simply.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on March 01, 2017, 07:45:58 AM
The point of view from which you call that a "misconception" is just a small set out of many different interpretations of QM. We don't know that there isn't a definite position for the particle; some theorists just want to insist upon it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on March 01, 2017, 08:40:45 AM
The uncertainty principle is still not the same as the observer effect, even, I'm pretty sure, for theories that include hidden variables.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on March 01, 2017, 12:20:34 PM
Oh, that's true, but in Lost World he specifically refers to Heisenberg.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on March 01, 2017, 12:36:41 PM
I mean, sure, whatever, I was never talking about Crichton or about crashing cars into each other. My initial response was to estockly's claim that it was the observer effect.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on March 01, 2017, 02:15:08 PM
Well, you're taking one side of a controversy (which is fair enough) and then calling the other side a "misconception" (which is no settled matter).
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on March 01, 2017, 02:25:37 PM
Despite what Jeff Goldblum might tell you, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle had no applicability to dinosaurs on Isla Sorna.
His is position was similar to "if we observe the Andromeda Galaxy we have affected the Andromeda Galaxy." Stupid on the face of it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on March 01, 2017, 03:36:29 PM
Well, you're taking one side of a controversy (which is fair enough) and then calling the other side a "misconception" (which is no settled matter).
Didn't you just say "that's true" when I said it wasn't the observer effect, and now when I repeated that you're saying it's not settled?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on March 01, 2017, 10:34:51 PM
What position do you think you're arguing against?

I never said that actively measuring subatomic things doesn't have an effect on them.

I just pointed out that there's a common misconception that this is the only reason we can't pin down position and momentum at the same time. The misconception is that a particle has an exact momentum and position. I keep repeating that because I don't know how to say it more simply.

A particle can have a precisely calculated momentum. A particle can have a precisely calculated position. A particle cannot have both at the same time, is my understanding of this particular issue.

The observer effect relates to the mechanisms used to observe subatomic particles as well. Our methods for observing them affect their behavior. Not distant galaxies.

The observer effect has been rightly or wrongly applied in other areas, like social science, where simply measuring public opinion by taking a poll has an effect on the results.

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on March 03, 2017, 12:37:57 AM
A skeptical love story:

(http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20120415.gif)

(I know it's super old. I recently decided to do a bit of an archive binge because it's been years since I made the effort to keep up to date with each new comic.)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on March 06, 2017, 11:05:42 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/klKShkp.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on March 07, 2017, 06:47:44 AM
And some people still think there's no God!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bimble on March 07, 2017, 02:43:06 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/klKShkp.gif)

I saw the opening bit of that and was just waiting for a starship to fly through...  ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX9FU8bmxQs
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 09, 2017, 08:05:02 PM
(https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aVq0Ao2_460s.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 14, 2017, 08:46:01 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/kmOCYky.jpg)

(http://www.livememe.com/udxaoqp.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on March 17, 2017, 03:08:14 PM
Air Force's X-37B Space Plane

(https://img.purch.com/w/640/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zcGFjZS5jb20vaW1hZ2VzL2kvMDAwLzA2My82OTcvaTAyL25hc2EteC0zN2Itb3R2LmpwZz8xNDg5NzE4MTQ1)

Air Force's Mysterious X-37B Space Plane Nears Orbital Record
http://www.space.com/36101-x-37b-military-space-plane-nears-record.html
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on March 17, 2017, 03:38:27 PM
That website is a terrible spam trap.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 17, 2017, 05:07:31 PM
That website is a terrible spam trap.

Maybe for internet n00bs without noscript and an adblocker it is. >}|:o)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: teethering on March 17, 2017, 07:52:39 PM
And some people still think there's no God!

I know you're joking, but it's precisely images like that that reinforce my non-belief.  The incongruity of the tininess and insignificance of organisms in an impossibly thin organic layer on a small rocky planet in this endless sea of nothingness teeming with galaxies filled with billions of stars with the idea that these organisms are somehow significant is just absurd.  We're the bacteria on a speck of dust in a cathedral and we think the music is playing for us.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 17, 2017, 09:21:01 PM
And some people still think there's no God!

I know you're joking, but it's precisely images like that that reinforce my non-belief.  The incongruity of the tininess and insignificance of organisms in an impossibly thin organic layer on a small rocky planet in this endless sea of nothingness teeming with galaxies filled with billions of stars with the idea that these organisms are somehow significant is just absurd.  We're the bacteria on a speck of dust in a cathedral and we think the music is playing for us.

Well, not to equate them to bacteria, but I have in the past on occasion sung for my guppies.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on March 25, 2017, 03:19:38 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/CyGgLlF.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 29, 2017, 09:00:38 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8BN7OqXwAQQHSA.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 01, 2017, 08:49:10 PM
(http://globalwarming-factorfiction.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/spratti-gw-toon1.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 08, 2017, 02:58:37 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/5IV0Po9.jpg)

(http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/JhT143MvWoFAu0xhpikhxw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NQ--/http://globalfinance.zenfs.com/en_us/Finance/US_AFTP_SILICONALLEY_H_LIVE/We_just_spotted_our_favorite-feccac426bc9c7f0caf139e5eecf1101)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on April 11, 2017, 02:04:27 PM
On the importance of fact checking:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9DxXWvXoAA0Ble.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 11, 2017, 02:32:11 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/18/Cognitive_Bias_Codex_-_180%2B_biases%2C_designed_by_John_Manoogian_III_%28jm3%29.jpg/1500px-Cognitive_Bias_Codex_-_180%2B_biases%2C_designed_by_John_Manoogian_III_%28jm3%29.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: HighPockets on April 17, 2017, 03:22:57 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3g4pKgWEAAE_In.jpg:large)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 20, 2017, 05:12:06 PM
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/17951557_1221056934673159_2918563514172688066_n.jpg?oh=fba6f8e13f00743c358481cf7ae5b072&oe=5984A0D2)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 21, 2017, 01:34:27 PM
Science in America - Neil deGrasse Tyson - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MqTOEospfo

I liked this.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 22, 2017, 09:54:46 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/iM2kss8.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on April 22, 2017, 10:32:58 PM
Hah!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 23, 2017, 05:50:07 PM
We ain't have'n no bad effect on the planet!

(https://media.giphy.com/media/xTk9ZPSV1TLrKjONO0/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 23, 2017, 06:35:06 PM
That place must have either really bad tires or really bad roads.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 23, 2017, 06:40:26 PM
That place must have either really bad tires or really bad roads.
Or neither. They were collected to be recycled. Then lightning hit the pile and it ignited. (Assuming it's the tire conflagration I'm familiar with.) Those industrial-strength rubber mats that are used to soften the floor a bit for workers are made out of old tires, and there are other uses as well.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on April 23, 2017, 08:51:44 PM
To be fair, that image alone doesn't prove climate change, or really anything other than tyres, when burned, produce black smoke. It could be argued either that the smoke is not harmful, or that it dissipates into the atmosphere, or something like that. Then you have to go and find some actual data.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 23, 2017, 10:00:43 PM
To be fair, that image alone doesn't prove climate change, or really anything other than tyres, when burned, produce black smoke. It could be argued either that the smoke is not harmful, or that it dissipates into the atmosphere, or something like that. Then you have to go and find some actual data.
Did I say it did?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on April 24, 2017, 01:25:03 AM
To be fair, that image alone doesn't prove climate change, or really anything other than tyres, when burned, produce black smoke. It could be argued either that the smoke is not harmful, or that it dissipates into the atmosphere, or something like that. Then you have to go and find some actual data.
Did I say it did?
Did I say that you said it did?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 24, 2017, 07:30:55 AM
To be fair, that image alone doesn't prove climate change, or really anything other than tyres, when burned, produce black smoke. It could be argued either that the smoke is not harmful, or that it dissipates into the atmosphere, or something like that. Then you have to go and find some actual data.
Did I say it did?
Did I say that you said it did?
"To be fair..." is a code for "You're wrong and here's why."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on April 25, 2017, 12:13:11 AM
To be fair, that image alone doesn't prove climate change, or really anything other than tyres, when burned, produce black smoke. It could be argued either that the smoke is not harmful, or that it dissipates into the atmosphere, or something like that. Then you have to go and find some actual data.
Did I say it did?
Did I say that you said it did?
"To be fair..." is a code for "You're wrong and here's why."
To be fair, the caption given with the image kind of did make the suggestion that a ton of black smoke produced by burning tyres was causally connected to global warming. Which it is.

What I'm arguing is that if you really wanted to deny global warming (which I don't), you could make a case for that particular image not being demonstrative of anything.

Now I'm wondering exactly what it is you are actually arguing with me about.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Henning on April 29, 2017, 12:06:13 PM
(https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/a7rGL7m_460s.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on May 09, 2017, 01:02:13 PM
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/s960x960/16112975_782345671913162_6021301098486079798_o.jpg?oh=6cd6753f25fb5a51abb294fdeee13836&oe=5981BD09)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 10, 2017, 12:36:36 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_b2BGCXoAE0xWb.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 12, 2017, 07:18:47 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/ZTajzCB.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 12, 2017, 08:41:05 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/ZTajzCB.jpg)
♫Little brown jug, oh I love you!
Little brown jug, and mutate too!♫
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on May 15, 2017, 01:19:28 PM
Thunderbolts and lightning, very, very frightening...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxJTQuWISbk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 16, 2017, 01:47:46 PM
Hot Take:

(http://i.imgur.com/log7TmE.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Friendly Angel on May 16, 2017, 02:14:14 PM
Hot Take:

(http://i.imgur.com/log7TmE.png)

I think whoever made that chart should learn 1.00 or 2.00 things about sig figs.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on May 18, 2017, 07:07:26 AM
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/18485571_1724865680862665_3497430446224930562_n.jpg?oh=4d2059c9d256a01036df0cfd52733ac4&oe=59A4EA47)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 24, 2017, 11:27:45 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/Bj6BjN9.png?1)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 06, 2017, 09:53:09 PM
AeroFarms, a vertical farm in New Jersey:
(http://i.imgur.com/pmIkyAD.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 07, 2017, 10:33:37 AM
AeroFarms, a vertical farm in New Jersey:
(http://i.imgur.com/pmIkyAD.jpg)
Ah, "city farms" prototype?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 07, 2017, 11:55:24 AM
AeroFarms, a vertical farm in New Jersey:
(http://i.imgur.com/pmIkyAD.jpg)
Ah, "city farms" prototype?

I've seen similar facilities (but smaller) where they plant seeds, get them  to sprout and grow then plant the sprouts in the ground to get a jump start on the growing season or to fit more crops into the same year.

Is that what this is?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 07, 2017, 02:04:41 PM
LED based growlights are changing the math of greenhousing.  They last a long time, use little energy, generate little heat and can be made to emit on those specifics frequencies used for photosynthesis.  The technology had made greenhousing economically viable in certain markets for certain kinds of produce and the technology is only getting cheaper. 

This is amazing because greenhousing like this uses negligible amounts of water, nitrogen and real estate compared to fields.  You're pretty much restricted to small plants which grow rapidly under unlimited-water conditions, though.  So the theoretical future would be a food infrastructure peppered with spinach, herb, etc. facilities which improve food quality, decrease environmental impact, cut x% of food-miles and obviate x% of current cropland. 

It's really cool stuff and it's just taking off now. 
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on June 07, 2017, 07:20:18 PM
It also occurs in three dimensions instead of two, which expands the space available for growing.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 07, 2017, 07:30:10 PM
And because it's (ideally) a closed-environment, you don't have agricultural run-off or pesticides.

You can also keep the temperature/humidity/air ideal year-round and tightly control day-night cycling. 

They're basically super cool, high-tech, ultra efficient greenhouses. 

And something I didn't know before doing a little reading on these is that greenhouses already have a significant presence in crop production.  One of the best examples would be the UK's Thanet Earth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanet_Earth), which is a single greenhouse complex that accounts for ~10% of Britain's annual tomato, capsicum and cucumber production.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWKAY9mI0xc

Edit:

More of Thanet Earth:

(http://i.imgur.com/Zc3z1WC.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/fWyU4iW.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/nzW6tpH.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/8uzrzD9.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 07, 2017, 09:42:47 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/Xx5AUfp.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 07, 2017, 10:14:34 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/Xx5AUfp.jpg)

1912! Holy shit I thought the earliest predictions were in the 30s!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on June 08, 2017, 07:16:37 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/Xx5AUfp.jpg)

1912! Holy shit I thought the earliest predictions were in the 30s!

Svante Arrhenius predicted climate change based on his experiments with CO2 as early as 1896.

EDIT: Actually, correction; apparently that's not quite true (http://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf):

Quote
Arrhenius’s paper is the first to quantify the contribution of carbon dioxide to the greenhouse effect (Sections I-IV) and to speculate about whether variations in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide have contributed to long-term variations in climate (Section V). Throughout this paper, Arrhenius refers to carbon dioxide as “carbonic acid” in accordance with the convention at the time he was writing.

Contrary to some misunderstandings, Arrhenius does not explicitly suggest in this paper that the burning of fossil fuels will cause global warming, though it is clear that he is aware that fossil fuels are a potentially significant source of carbon dioxide (page 270), and he does explicitly suggest this outcome in later work.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on June 08, 2017, 10:40:39 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/37zfZNo.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on June 09, 2017, 02:08:08 AM
Holy crow that took a long time to load.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 09, 2017, 06:27:37 AM
Holy crow that took a long time to load.
Odd, it went like clockwork for me.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 10, 2017, 01:13:57 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DB5b51uUMAAkWFw.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 16, 2017, 03:08:33 AM
Elephant Foot | Human Foot:

(https://i.imgur.com/zlyjVev.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 16, 2017, 07:25:21 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCRyoShXsAIl0cz.jpg:large)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 16, 2017, 09:04:01 AM
(https://i.redd.it/j34r7i7wsy3z.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: AQB24712 on June 16, 2017, 09:50:45 AM
Steve makes it onto the Cats in Space Quoting Scientists Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/spacekitties/) page!

(http://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/19225110_1226842890771766_4445656818873400906_n.jpg?oh=f2ce2d9744d12831a5663adb85a6e2f9&oe=599D9FDD)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on June 16, 2017, 12:31:46 PM
(https://i.chzbgr.com/full/7951646208/h0A9F0525/)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on June 17, 2017, 10:59:49 AM
(http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/1467891968-20160707.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on June 18, 2017, 08:32:52 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/mTTaV1e.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 19, 2017, 04:09:58 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCRyoShXsAIl0cz.jpg:large)

Seals! Ha!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 19, 2017, 04:12:29 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0_QKTwvRBQ




Astronomy Picture of the Day (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)

Quote
Explanation: Where will you be during the Eclipse across America? On August 21, the shadow of the Moon will cross the continental USA for the first time since 1979. The predicted path -- a certainty given modern astronomical knowledge -- is shown in the featured NASA video. Most people in the USA will be within a day's drive to the path of the total solar eclipse, while the rest of North America will see a partial solar eclipse. In the path of totality, given clear-enough skies, the Moon will block out the Sun making it eerily dark for as long as 2 minutes and 40 seconds. If interested in attending an eclipse party, please contact your local amateur astronomical society, science center, park, or university to see if one is already being planning. Some eclipse chasers have traveled to the end of the world to see a total eclipse of the Sun, and along the way have recorded many entertaining adventure stories.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 19, 2017, 05:14:26 PM
Carbondale, Illinois, Home of Southern Illinois U., is the best spot in the country to see the eclipse. NASA is visiting SIU for this event. And it's two hours from St. Louis, so you can also see a real live Flying Saucer (http://www.beerknurd.com/locations/st-louis-flying-saucer).
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 22, 2017, 06:37:02 PM
Herd_Immunity.gifv (http://i.imgur.com/J7LANQ4.mp4)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on June 22, 2017, 09:51:23 PM
Herd_Immunity.gifv (http://i.imgur.com/J7LANQ4.mp4)

FIFY
(http://i.imgur.com/J7LANQ4.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on June 22, 2017, 10:26:34 PM
Uranium Decay
(https://i.imgur.com/126QDdS.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 25, 2017, 05:55:46 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/tcjL78k.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Mr. Beagle on July 03, 2017, 07:02:15 PM
(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/NepXlnx0lR_naKq-ndvLUn5jPLo=/1600x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/8780977/casualties__1_.0.png)

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/7/3/15903154/asteroid-death-one-chart
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on July 07, 2017, 01:09:21 PM
Just a meteor hitting the moon.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8fe58ROYG0
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 07, 2017, 03:30:03 PM
Just a meteor hitting the moon.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8fe58ROYG0
Nope, alien spaceship.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 21, 2017, 05:22:30 PM
(https://i.redd.it/lzerobl3nyaz.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 24, 2017, 11:40:05 AM
Our new GOES-16 satellite is providing great imagery of the hurricane that's about to hit Texas:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DH_4szGW0AAZ3xS.jpg)


It's currently a tropical storm but is expected to hit category 3 before landfall:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DIANg9ZXsAIQEYp.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 04, 2017, 06:08:21 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/yKEBe1x.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 12, 2017, 03:25:20 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/tQoV0g1.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on September 12, 2017, 02:15:18 PM
Best eclipse video I've seen yet:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D9j-8Vhyto
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 17, 2017, 04:54:29 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJ4UF2jWAAALDAf.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 17, 2017, 05:35:48 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJ4UF2jWAAALDAf.jpg)
Nah, just have him boarded.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bimble on September 17, 2017, 05:56:34 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJ4UF2jWAAALDAf.jpg)

is his bark worse than his bite??  ;D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 17, 2017, 05:57:48 PM
That kind of comment really goes against the grain.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 17, 2017, 06:58:16 PM
I find its expression a bit wooden.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 17, 2017, 07:09:08 PM
I find its expression a bit wooden.
His bark is definitely worse than his bite.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 17, 2017, 08:08:09 PM
I don't know about that, but that expression gives me a knot in my stomach. It's like it's pining for something. Or maybe it just stems from it being board. If it leaves it like that, and just sticks with it, I'm not sure what I wood do. I feel like it should branch out a bit, emotionally speaking. Just one expression isn't enough; you need at least two or tree.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 17, 2017, 09:32:24 PM
Fuck this, I'm going to get totally sanded.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Alex Simmons on September 18, 2017, 03:23:24 AM
He might be a little tough to lumber around in that condition.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Alex Simmons on September 18, 2017, 03:26:21 AM
Fuck this, I'm going to get totally sanded.
I saw what you did there. A little plane for my taste.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 18, 2017, 06:54:14 AM
He might be a little tough to lumber around in that condition.
It's the only way to survive when one is starting a splinter group.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Friendly Angel on September 18, 2017, 05:38:05 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/rcY9V5P.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 21, 2017, 02:04:02 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/EmYWzE2l.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on September 21, 2017, 11:21:08 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/rcY9V5P.png)

Great now we have chemtrails spreading gay.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on September 21, 2017, 11:26:13 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/rcY9V5P.png)

Great now we have chemtrails spreading gay.

Clearly living under power lines gives you the gay.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on September 22, 2017, 11:55:28 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/rcY9V5P.png)

GAY POWER
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on October 06, 2017, 12:27:39 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DLT7x9tWkAA_5w7.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on October 07, 2017, 12:17:59 PM
Was that originally posted by a flat Earther somewhere? Seems like the sort of thing one of them would make to "prove" that we're not moving as fast as "they" claim.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on October 07, 2017, 12:59:01 PM
I literally can't tell if it's promoting or lambasting flat earthers. 
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on October 07, 2017, 05:04:01 PM
Yeah, Poe's law applies for sure.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on October 07, 2017, 08:41:43 PM
It reminds me of the question that was asked on the SGU a few months ago (https://sguforums.com/index.php/topic,48165.msg9478622.html#msg9478622).
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on October 08, 2017, 07:46:02 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/6SGFLD1.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on October 18, 2017, 02:19:40 PM
 (https://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2017/10/171018104335_1_540x360.jpg)
Potential human habitat located on the moon -- ScienceDaily (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/10/171018104335.htm)

Quote
Lava tubes exist on Earth, but their lunar counterparts are much larger. For a lava tube to be detectable by gravity data, it would need to extend several kilometers in length and at least one kilometer in height and width -- which means the lava tube near the Marius Hills is spacious enough to house one of the United States' largest cities, if the gravity results are correct.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on October 18, 2017, 03:00:54 PM
Holey Moon, Batman!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on October 19, 2017, 08:07:03 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/X7lE3cz.png)

From: Warning of 'ecological Armageddon' after dramatic plunge in insect numbers (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/18/warning-of-ecological-armageddon-after-dramatic-plunge-in-insect-numbers)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on October 19, 2017, 08:15:03 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/X7lE3cz.png)

From: Warning of 'ecological Armageddon' after dramatic plunge in insect numbers (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/18/warning-of-ecological-armageddon-after-dramatic-plunge-in-insect-numbers)

That is fucking terrifying. As if we didn't have enough to worry about.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on October 19, 2017, 08:42:03 PM
There will be Silent Springs in the future.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: HighPockets on October 20, 2017, 03:55:23 PM
If most of them are mosquitoes, good riddance.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on October 28, 2017, 09:51:22 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/KhuxMs8.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on October 31, 2017, 02:34:22 PM

Dark Matter


Astronomy Picture of the Day (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)

(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1710/DarkMatter_KipacAmnh_960.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on October 31, 2017, 02:38:49 PM
"It's not a toomah!"
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on October 31, 2017, 05:07:50 PM
Damnit I was just going to say that!

It does look like a tumor.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Billzbub on November 01, 2017, 09:59:52 AM
We need to get Eleven to close that shit.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on November 01, 2017, 11:39:50 AM
Spoilers!!!!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on November 01, 2017, 11:40:37 AM
(https://safr.kingfeatures.com/idn/cnfeed/zone/js/content.php?file=aHR0cDovL3NhZnIua2luZ2ZlYXR1cmVzLmNvbS9CaXphcnJvLzIwMDYvMDYvQml6YXJyb19wLjIwMDYwNjI5XzYxNi5naWY=)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on November 01, 2017, 12:03:06 PM
Spoilers!!!!
I feel like if you've watched enough to understand it, it's not really a spoiler any more.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on November 01, 2017, 12:03:55 PM
Spoilers!!!!
I feel like if you've watched enough to understand it, it's not really a spoiler any more.
If you watch the previews it's not a spoiler.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on November 01, 2017, 12:22:06 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/KhuxMs8.jpg)

This isn't entirely accurate because Jupiter is made out of gas. A football field would be too heavy and would cause Jupiter to fall out of the sky.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on November 01, 2017, 01:32:01 PM
Spoilers!!!!
I feel like if you've watched enough to understand it, it's not really a spoiler any more.
If you watch the previews it's not a spoiler.

Oh, I meant it as a joke, to that exact point.  I should have tagged it as such
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on November 01, 2017, 01:40:55 PM
I figured it probably was, but I've seen people on FB legitimately complaining about equally vague things (or things that you could only tell is a spoiler if you've seen the thing it "spoils", and then their saying it's a spoiler is actually what spoils it for people who aren't caught up).
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: HighPockets on November 01, 2017, 02:01:37 PM
We need to get it to Eleven to close that shit.

I kept reading that with the extra words my brain put in and thought he was talking about Spinal Tap, and I couldn't figure out what that had to do with anything... :-\

Now I understand what you're spoiling/not-spoiling...

Boy, am I dense.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on December 03, 2017, 07:43:00 AM
(https://media.oglaf.com/comic/Fountain_of_Doubt.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on December 08, 2017, 07:16:16 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/fEA1Pg7m.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on December 11, 2017, 09:09:23 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/ETFefD6.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Henning on December 11, 2017, 10:43:41 AM
Who 'zat guy?
Or is it just a composite of an average youtuber?  :)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on December 11, 2017, 10:51:17 AM
Who 'zat guy?
Or is it just a composite of an average youtuber?  :)
And is a Mustang really a truck?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on December 14, 2017, 06:40:13 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/dPr9zbx.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on December 18, 2017, 03:22:08 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/2n4myS0.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on December 18, 2017, 06:00:41 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ZxVQDUU.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on December 18, 2017, 06:15:52 PM
"Slaughterbot" Autonomous Killer Drones - YouTube


This is very well done.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecClODh4zYk

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: starnado on December 24, 2017, 08:31:46 AM
(http://i1303.photobucket.com/albums/ag156/rimbaud3000/Mobile%20Uploads/FB_IMG_1514121956760_zpsjxagovaf.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 25, 2017, 12:37:30 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nbeD1mwCdo
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Rai on January 02, 2018, 09:26:48 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DSfszdnV4AAXQGO.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on January 02, 2018, 11:28:37 AM
Apparently the first thing that we evolved and lost was dance.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on January 02, 2018, 11:29:27 AM
Apparently the first thing that we evolved and lost was dance.
Early swingers.  ;)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 03, 2018, 11:21:18 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/EIjwu0i.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Jaloopa on January 11, 2018, 08:21:00 AM
(https://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20110104.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 14, 2018, 08:28:18 PM
(https://i.redd.it/l4ln1550f3a01.jpg)

Checkmate!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on February 13, 2018, 10:03:18 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/eDf5nip.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on February 13, 2018, 10:47:22 AM
You had me at "All Hover"
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 13, 2018, 11:06:35 AM
Love 2000 Hogs Yea

Ambitious!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 15, 2018, 11:03:15 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1SgmFa0r04
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 16, 2018, 01:07:35 PM
<video>

That was interesting. It never occurred to me that the ppm would fluctuate over the year. Now, of course it is obvious. Do you know if they have this simulation in other map projections?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 16, 2018, 01:31:56 PM
I went to google that and the first result's super distracting: http://co2.digitalcartography.org/

You can click-drag to manipulate the focal point of the map projection!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Friendly Angel on February 16, 2018, 01:37:23 PM
I went to google that and the first result's super distracting: http://co2.digitalcartography.org/

You can click-drag to manipulate the focal point of the map projection!

That's pretty cool.  Why would there be so much at the north pole, and not at the south pole?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 16, 2018, 02:27:04 PM
I went to google that and the first result's super distracting: http://co2.digitalcartography.org/

You can click-drag to manipulate the focal point of the map projection!

That's pretty cool.  Why would there be so much at the north pole, and not at the south pole?
People distribution?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 17, 2018, 04:30:43 AM
I went to google that and the first result's super distracting: http://co2.digitalcartography.org/

You can click-drag to manipulate the focal point of the map projection!

That's pretty cool.  Why would there be so much at the north pole, and not at the south pole?
People distribution?

Yes, particularly the distribution of industrialized nations with high population densities, which in turn is mainly due to land mass distribution. Also there are large carbon sinks in the tropics, and air masses and weather systems like tropical storms (which have a mixing effect on well mixed GHGs) have a hard time crossing the equator due to the Coriolis effect (https://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/ASK/hurricanes.html) (and the air and ocean currents that result from that effect). And of course the southern ocean is a huge carbon sink (https://www.nature.com/news/southern-ocean-sucks-up-more-carbon-dioxide-than-was-thought-1.18347) as well.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: kvuo75 on February 17, 2018, 10:55:17 AM
the scale is only what.. 377ppm to 395ppm?

its interesting to look at but does it actually mean anything?

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 17, 2018, 11:47:01 AM
I don't know, either.  Conveys distribution and variation.  Identifying carbon sources and sinks?  Making inferences about atmospheric behavior?

If we ever build heavy-duty carbon sequestration tech, we'd probably use data like that to target installation sites.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 17, 2018, 02:21:48 PM
(https://i.redd.it/038ws7z8png01.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 17, 2018, 02:52:45 PM
But can anti-vaxxers read?  ???
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on February 17, 2018, 06:01:19 PM
the scale is only what.. 377ppm to 395ppm?

its interesting to look at but does it actually mean anything?
It shows how CO2 moves around the planet.

And I mean, a world surface map only goes from 6,356.8 to 6,384.4 km from the center, but that's still kind of an important range.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: HighPockets on February 17, 2018, 07:17:10 PM
But can anti-vaxxers read?  ???

On first glance I thought it read, "This is Polio vaccine" I missed the period and misread "vaccinate" and thought it was a anti-vax sign.

So apparently skeptics can't read sometimes either.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on February 17, 2018, 10:38:15 PM
Time hug!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on February 22, 2018, 02:46:45 PM
Excellent video breaking down Homeopathy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HslUzw35mc
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: lonely moa on February 26, 2018, 12:53:37 AM
But can anti-vaxxers read?  ???

Could have been my Mum.... no vaccine in 1952, though.  She made sure I was when it was available.  I wish Gardasil  was around earlier... would have saved a lot of grief!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on March 16, 2018, 08:56:57 PM
https://satwcomic.com/could-have-been-matt-damon

(https://i.imgur.com/skKWf9f.png) (https://satwcomic.com/could-have-been-matt-damon)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on March 27, 2018, 08:05:21 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/avEPxL6.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on March 31, 2018, 02:07:05 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/KzG92ec.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on March 31, 2018, 02:47:01 PM
Started too large to get T.rump's mind on that scale?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on April 07, 2018, 02:33:04 PM
Space Shuttle launches as seen from the NASA/JSC WB-57 High Altitude Research aircraft (https://airbornescience.nasa.gov/aircraft/WB-57)

(http://chamorrobible.org/images/photos/gpw-20050129-NASA-GPN-2000-001358-clouds-launch-Space-Shuttle-Columbia-STS-2-Florida-19811112-medium.jpg)

(https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/555830main_134launchthroughclouds_full.jpg)


This pic is from the ISS

(https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/573236main_iss028e018218_full.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on April 10, 2018, 01:46:27 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DaYMTkKVAAAFxBa.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: D'oh! on April 11, 2018, 04:44:03 AM
LOVE Jack Chick tracts! Collect 'em all:

http://www.chick.com/catalog/tractlist.asp?q=163&Language=English

PS To this day I'm impressed that he was able to register "Chick.com" before the porn industry. Or farmers.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on April 17, 2018, 05:37:05 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/4d9YFbR.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 17, 2018, 06:51:15 PM
Buncha graphic death there.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on April 17, 2018, 09:07:27 PM
Buncha graphic death there.


BOOOOOO!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 17, 2018, 09:29:01 PM
Buncha graphic death there.


BOOOOOO!
Thank you, thank you! I'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip your waitress.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on April 18, 2018, 11:57:57 AM
Buncha graphic death there.


BOOOOOO!
Thank you, thank you! I'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip your waitress.

Is that like tipping a cow?

(https://i.imgur.com/AMI2Yiz.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Friendly Angel on April 18, 2018, 12:27:19 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/4d9YFbR.png)

I think we need to add airplane disasters to this list.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Mr. Beagle on April 18, 2018, 02:24:21 PM
(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/evangelism.png)

We've been pwned!

Let me say in my defense, however, that my life became MUCH more joyful the day I threw out all my socks and bought just three styles in bulk.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: lonely moa on April 18, 2018, 02:54:35 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/4d9YFbR.png)

what John Hopkns has to say

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp-content/uploads/sites/26/2016/05/2300death.jpg&w=1484
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on April 20, 2018, 10:39:20 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DaYMTkKVAAAFxBa.jpg)

Got that one right here.

(https://i.imgur.com/87Ob9uG.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Desert Fox on April 21, 2018, 06:02:37 PM
Extended version
(https://i.imgur.com/VbKV9DF.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on April 21, 2018, 08:02:12 PM
Buncha graphic death there.

Graphic Death put on a great show when they opened for Nine Inch Nails back in '92.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on April 22, 2018, 01:17:47 PM
Accurate?

(https://i.redd.it/c1c5u0dhret01.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 22, 2018, 01:32:38 PM
Should the top one match one of the two below it if a person has one of those conditions?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on April 24, 2018, 01:26:19 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/bl7RDgq.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/X3anCgk.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 24, 2018, 02:01:37 PM
"SKILLFULLY COMBINED WITH A NUMBER OF OTHER INGREDIENTS."

"We won't tell you what those ingredients are, however, you'd just be frightened."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Friendly Angel on April 24, 2018, 02:15:40 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/X3anCgk.jpg)

How much is an "m"  ?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on April 24, 2018, 02:34:31 PM
"SKILLFULLY COMBINED WITH A NUMBER OF OTHER INGREDIENTS."

"We won't tell you what those ingredients are, however, you'd just be frightened."

"Now with extra lead and mercury for that taste you remember as a kid!"
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 24, 2018, 02:42:28 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/X3anCgk.jpg)

How much is an "m"  ?
39.3701 inches.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: albator on April 24, 2018, 02:47:47 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minim_(unit)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 24, 2018, 03:02:18 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minim_(unit)

This link works:

Minim (unit) - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minim_(unit))
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Friendly Angel on April 24, 2018, 03:17:33 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minim_(unit)

This link works:

Minim (unit) - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minim_(unit))

OK, that was truly interesting, thanks!

Almost homeopathic concentrations of the good stuff in that cough syrup though.

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bimble on April 24, 2018, 03:39:14 PM
and presumably, 'gr.' will be 'grain' and not 'gramme'. For all the imperial measurements!  ;D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: albator on April 24, 2018, 04:18:48 PM
1933 and the FDA was already doing the lord works.
Quote
Examination of the drug product involved in this action disclosed that the article contained no ingredient or combination of ingredients xapable of producing certain curative and therapeutic effects claimed in the labeling.
https://fdanj.nlm.nih.gov/catalog/fdnj20156
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on April 25, 2018, 01:58:37 PM
Here's how much groundwater-pumping has sunk this farm:
(http://i.imgur.com/FvVEqni.jpg)

Groundwater-Related Subsidence: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groundwater-related_subsidence)
Quote
The cause of the long-term surface changes associated with this phenomenon are fairly well known.[6] As shown in the USGS figure, aquifers are frequently associated with compressible layers of silt or clay.

As the groundwater is pumped out, the effective stress changes, precipitating consolidation, which is often non-reversible. Thus, the total volume of the silts and clays is reduced, resulting in the lowering of the surface. The damage at the surface is much greater if there is differential settlement, or large-scale features, such as sinkholes and fissures.

I've read that it's still sinking but not quite as dramatically. They've already got most of the water out.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: fred.slota on April 25, 2018, 06:03:34 PM
Wait, are they saying that pre-1925 they sunk electrical poles 30+ feet deep, and that the land sank while the pole stayed constant?

Or just, here's a modern pole (well, modern in 1977), and we've marked where ground height used to be, but before this pole was in place?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 25, 2018, 06:12:26 PM
I've never seen telephone poles that high. They would whip like crazy during the sirocco.

(And yes, wrong continent, but you know what I mean.)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 25, 2018, 08:13:47 PM

I've read that it's still sinking but not quite as dramatically. They've already got most of the water out.

The sinking was far more widespread during the drought of the last couple years when they were pumping water at much higher rates.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on April 25, 2018, 11:05:29 PM
I've never seen telephone poles that high. They would whip like crazy during the sirocco.

(And yes, wrong continent, but you know what I mean.)

Santa Ana winds. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Ana_winds)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on April 25, 2018, 11:10:50 PM
There's no telephone facilities on that pole line, it is power only.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 26, 2018, 05:47:57 AM
I've never seen telephone poles that high. They would whip like crazy during the sirocco.

(And yes, wrong continent, but you know what I mean.)

Santa Ana winds. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Ana_winds)
Yeah, that. Sirocco was more Bogart, however.  ;D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on April 26, 2018, 09:24:39 AM
Dude don't Bogart my Scirocco
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on May 05, 2018, 09:39:44 AM
(https://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/1525526791-20180505.png)

Hovertext:
(click to show/hide)

Big Red Button:
(click to show/hide)

Sauce: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/vavilov
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on May 07, 2018, 09:01:25 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/165EVXD.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on May 28, 2018, 10:01:34 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ieRvBpw.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on May 30, 2018, 01:50:36 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btIGDkR3Tpo

What a great visualization.


Astronomy Picture of the Day (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)
Quote
The Case of the Backwards Orbiting Asteroid
Explanation: Why does asteroid 2015 BZ509 orbit the Sun the backwards? As shown in the featured animation, Jupiter's trojan asteroids orbit the Sun in two major groups -- one just ahead of Jupiter, and one just behind -- but all orbit the Sun in the same direction as Jupiter. Asteroid BZ509 however, discovered in 2015 and currently unnamed, orbits the Sun in retrograde and in a more complex gravitational dance with Jupiter. The reason why is currently unknown and a topic of research -- but if resolved might tell us about the early Solar System. A recently popular hypothesis holds that BZ509 was captured by Jupiter from interstellar space billions of years ago, while a competing conjecture posits that BZ509 came from our Solar System's own distant Oort cloud of comets, perhaps more recently. The answer may only become known after more detailed models of the likelihood and stability of orbits near Jupiter are studied, or, possibly, by observing direct properties of the unusual object.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 05, 2018, 12:09:24 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ujE8IvA.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 05, 2018, 02:13:45 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ujE8IvA.png)

This is bad polling. There is no correct answer.

Some genetically modified foods have genes, some do not.

Some non-genetically modified foods have genes, some do not.

I think Michigan State needs to learn that if you're going to try to point out that others are ignorant of facts, that they themselves need to be extra careful and precise with the facts.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: HighPockets on June 05, 2018, 02:33:35 PM
Doesn't every living reproducing organism (that we would call "food")  have DNA/RNA in it's cells. Regardless of if it's been modified or not, they all have genes.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 05, 2018, 02:59:26 PM
Doesn't every living reproducing organism (that we would call "food")  have DNA/RNA in it's cells. Regardless of if it's been modified or not, they all have genes.

The organisms that produce the food all have genes, yes.

But the genes may not be present in the food they produce.

(This is actually an contentious issue where GMO labeling is required. If there are no genes present in the food, the manufacturers argue they should not be required them to be labeled as GMOs.)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 05, 2018, 03:50:19 PM
Are we perhaps talking about modified genes not originally found in nature?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 05, 2018, 04:15:00 PM
Are we perhaps talking about modified genes not originally found in nature?

No.

There are foods derived from living organisms, both GMO and non-GMO, generally highly processed foods, which have no DNA or genes, left in the food.

Sugar (sucrose, of course) is a good example. It's a simple molecule and there are no sugar cane genes or DNA present. It's a food, it can be derived from GMO or Non-GMO sources and has no genes.

So, that silly poll, probably designed and published to show that there are a lot of people who aren't as smart as the pollster, is really pretty stupid.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on June 05, 2018, 05:04:12 PM
The correct answer is still False, though.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 05, 2018, 05:08:49 PM
There is no correct answer.

On the contrary, it's unambiguously false.  It's a false-dichotomy between two wrong assertions.

Quote
Some genetically modified foods have genes, some do not.

Conflicts with 'all GMO have genes'

Quote
Some non-genetically modified foods have genes, some do not.

Conflicts with 'all non-GMO lack genes'

It looks like a disgust response prompted over-fixation on the wrong assertions you want to correct.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 05, 2018, 06:10:43 PM
The correct answer is still False, though.

There are genetically modified foods that have genes. There are non-genetically modified foods that do not have genes.

Yet False is correct?

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on June 05, 2018, 06:17:13 PM
"Men have brown eyes and women do not."

I'd say that's a false statement.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 05, 2018, 06:17:28 PM
Are we perhaps talking about modified genes not originally found in nature?

No.

There are foods derived from living organisms, both GMO and non-GMO, generally highly processed foods, which have no DNA or genes, left in the food.

Sugar (sucrose, of course) is a good example. It's a simple molecule and there are no sugar cane genes or DNA present. It's a food, it can be derived from GMO or Non-GMO sources and has no genes.

So, that silly poll, probably designed and published to show that there are a lot of people who aren't as smart as the pollster, is really pretty stupid.
Thanks. Monsanto World Headquarters is a few miles south of me. Never seen any "Frankenfood" people out front.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 05, 2018, 07:01:17 PM
"Men have brown eyes and women do not."

I'd say that's a false statement.

The "all" is implied?

It may be false, but it it's very silly. That's no way to write a poll question.

But I'm sure it made the pollsters feel smart.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 05, 2018, 11:08:54 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/InGrW8e.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on June 06, 2018, 12:25:36 AM
The correct answer is still False, though.

There are genetically modified foods that have genes. There are non-genetically modified foods that do not have genes.

Yet False is correct?
I think what CarbShark is trying to say is that a gene is only a gene when it is a part of a living organism. When we eat something, we kill it first, therefore the molecules that made genes when the organism was alive are no longer actually genes. Even, I suppose, if I pick a leaf from a lettuce plant and immediately shove it into my mouth-hole, at the very moment of separation from the plant the genes in the leaf become instantaneously inactive and no longer deserve the title of "gene". Instead, they are merely sequences of an inert molecule.

Although I may be way off here. CarbShark may have some strange definition of the word "gene" that I was previously unaware of.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 06, 2018, 12:47:23 AM
The correct answer is still False, though.

There are genetically modified foods that have genes. There are non-genetically modified foods that do not have genes.

Yet False is correct?
I think what CarbShark is trying to say is that a gene is only a gene when it is a part of a living organism. When we eat something, we kill it first, therefore the molecules that made genes when the organism was alive are no longer actually genes. Even, I suppose, if I pick a leaf from a lettuce plant and immediately shove it into my mouth-hole, at the very moment of separation from the plant the genes in the leaf become instantaneously inactive and no longer deserve the title of "gene". Instead, they are merely sequences of an inert molecule.

Although I may be way off here. CarbShark may have some strange definition of the word "gene" that I was previously unaware of.

No that's not at all what I'm trying to say. (And I do not agree with that)

Sucrose (table sugar) is a food. It has no genes (both GMO and non-GMO). You cannot do a scientific examination of sugar and find DNA or genes (using the ordinary standard definition). Lettuce, or Rib-eye steak do have DNA and genes (both GMO and non-GMO).

There are a number of foods that sufficiently processed as to remove all trace of DNA (or genes). This includes a number of familiar foods like vegetable oils; breakfast cereal; refined flours. From the living organism we extract foods that do not have genes.

And, no, this is not something I'm inventing, or some alt-science thing. Anyone fairly well versed in the issue of GMO foods and labeling would know about this (I'm surprised people here seem unfamiliar with it) and that's why this poll bugs me, because the pollsters didn't do even cursory research into the topic and just assumed they knew the answer. (rather smugly).

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on June 06, 2018, 01:14:05 AM
Well if you'd just said that at the beginning...
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on June 06, 2018, 07:37:26 AM
He did. Not right at the beginning, but the explanation that some foods are processed to the point of removing all DNA and the specific example of sugar were already mentioned above.

I still think the statement used in the survey is false, but not because I misunderstood CarbShark's point.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 06, 2018, 10:41:22 AM
The opposite statement is also false then:

Non-GMO foods have genes and GMO foods do not.

Do you agree it’s a poorly written survey?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on June 06, 2018, 10:52:18 AM
Yes, sometimes both a statement and its opposite are false.

It is poorly written, but that doesn't mean there's no correct answer.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on June 06, 2018, 02:50:58 PM
Yes, sometimes both a statement and its opposite are false.

It is poorly written, but that doesn't mean there's no correct answer.

Some questions are malformed in a way that constricts the answer space too much for a meaningful answer. This is easy to do with yes/no or true/false questions. The classic is "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" It may be possible to answer 'yes' or 'no' truthfully if you have previously or are currently beating your wife, but there is no way to answer "I have never beaten my wife" with 'yes' or 'no'.

The survey is like that. While there are conditions under which a true or false answer may reflect reality, there are other correct answers that can not be given. In that sense the survey is not even wrong.

BTW, this kind of framing effect is very powerful. I mean, I know that many foods don't have genes or DNA in them, yet the structure of the question eliminated that set of concepts from my consideration. If CarbShark hadn't broken the frame for me, I would have missed it completely. (Good job, CarbShark!)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 06, 2018, 03:05:24 PM
edit: Eh, nevermind.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on June 06, 2018, 08:27:58 PM
Like most public surveys on science knowledge, summarising and simplifying makes the responses misleading. If you read the intent of the question, its meaning is very clear. But technically it's incorrect. And as we all know, that's the best kind of incorrectness.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on June 20, 2018, 09:35:59 PM
Not sure about the accuracy or back story of this but the general sentiment seems fair enough.

(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/384/197/936.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on June 20, 2018, 10:55:07 PM
A: That was a protest about a real thing that is happening.

B:It wasn't "the media" that first circulated that image as being a real imigrant kid in a cage; it was a guy on Twitter.

C: These images should be real enough for you:

https://goo.gl/images/PwbPYN

https://goo.gl/images/4tCNxE

https://goo.gl/images/b8Yxqx

While we're on the subject, this is not entirely new. That first picture I linked was taken during the Obama administration. But it is true that Trump is pursuing the policy with a new level of enthusiasm and dishonesty.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on June 20, 2018, 11:51:14 PM
Fair enough.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 23, 2018, 04:29:38 PM
https://imgur.com/gallery/09nqoIg

(https://i.imgur.com/T0ibuKT.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/7EcRP8w.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/7NYzbFz.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on June 29, 2018, 05:22:35 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/xgsBkYd.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on June 30, 2018, 06:42:42 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/oNK7V6G.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on July 01, 2018, 09:14:38 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/JhvRU0P.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 03, 2018, 02:56:23 PM
Blacksmith heats steel bar to 1,800F.  Bends like a noodle:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzF1KySHmUA
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on July 06, 2018, 04:39:18 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ddZuvz1.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on July 06, 2018, 06:48:58 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ddZuvz1.png)

Hmmmm.... I think I might try that, thanks  :)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on July 06, 2018, 07:50:21 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ddZuvz1.png)

Hmmmm.... I think I might try that, thanks  :)

If all else fails there's always sci-hub.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on July 13, 2018, 02:26:07 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/iGsjiuMl.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on July 13, 2018, 12:03:06 PM
Love it
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on July 13, 2018, 10:03:37 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/tZGwezT.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on July 29, 2018, 05:51:14 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/iWA7Nws.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on July 29, 2018, 07:36:28 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/hcUgqyI.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on July 30, 2018, 01:12:49 PM
You're on fire werecow.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on July 30, 2018, 02:23:38 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/ddZuvz1.png)

Hmmmm.... I think I might try that, thanks  :)

If all else fails there's always sci-hub.

I understand that posting a citation with the hashtag #ICanHazPDF on Twitter is also a viable option.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on August 05, 2018, 06:54:39 AM
(http://s020.radikal.ru/i720/1601/78/6ccb2dd7f592.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on August 08, 2018, 09:36:43 PM
(https://i.redd.it/joaueyn2j0d11.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on August 08, 2018, 10:14:44 PM
At first I thought that was a tie-fighter on a microscope slide.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: D'oh! on August 09, 2018, 03:17:24 AM
...and I saw TIE fighter over the Hawaiian islands!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on August 09, 2018, 05:05:52 AM
I hope it didn't get burned.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on August 09, 2018, 06:59:12 AM
Wait, we're microchipping fungus now?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gebobs on August 09, 2018, 11:04:57 AM
That's badass!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: fred.slota on August 11, 2018, 12:34:56 AM
There's a little black spot on the sun today...
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on August 12, 2018, 03:39:25 PM
There's a sale on our gabardine suits today
They're all thirty percent off from yesterday
There's Fortrel polyester, leather, wool and tweed
Just a Visa or Mastercard is all you need

[Chorus 1:]
We've got every color, we've got ev'ry shade
We're located next door to Willy's Fun Arcade
We got every fabric that was ever made
But I'm known in this city as the King of Suede

[Verse 2:]
We got portly and regular and extra-long
(Is my size up there?)
We got tailors to fix it, if it comes out wrong
(Is my size up there?)
We got all kinds of sweatshirts, you can take your pick
(Is my size up there?)
With the collars ripped off, like in that Flashdance flick
(Is my size up there?)

[Chorus 2:]
Our prices are low, my staff is underpaid
You can buy off the rack or have it custom made
And it's all guaranteed to never shrink or fade
Cause of my reputation as the King of Suede
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on August 18, 2018, 06:26:58 PM
Shared by SciBabe (http://scibabe.com/):

(https://i.imgur.com/C1muUxZ.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on August 22, 2018, 01:49:53 PM

Astronomy Picture of the Day (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)

(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1808/Ryugu_Hayabusa2_1024.jpg)

Quote
Explanation: This big space diamond has an estimated value of over 80 billion dollars. It's only diamond in shape, though -- asteroid 162173 Ryugu is thought to be composed of mostly nickel and iron. Asteroids like Ryugu are interesting for several reasons, perhaps foremost because they are near the Earth and might, one day in the far future, pose an impact threat. In the nearer term, Ryugu is interesting because it may be possible to send future spacecraft there to mine it, thus providing humanity with a new source of valuable metals. Scientifically, Ryugu is interesting because it carries information about how our Solar System formed billions of years ago, and why its orbit takes it so close to Earth. Japan's robotic spacecraft Hayabusa2 just arrived at this one-kilometer wide asteroid in late June. The featured image shows surface structures unknown before spacecraft Hayabusa2's arrival, including rock fields and craters. Within the next three months, Hayabusa2 is scheduled to unleash several probes, some that will land on Ryugu and hop around, while Hayabusa2 itself will mine just a little bit of the asteroid for return to Earth.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on August 22, 2018, 07:32:37 PM
Heck, this thread could just contain a live link to APOD.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on August 22, 2018, 07:51:50 PM
Heck, this thread could just contain a live link to APOD.
I get them in the mail every day.  :love:
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on August 23, 2018, 02:19:16 AM
Imagine a nickel-iron asteroid like this tugged into orbit around Earth and anchoring a space elevator.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bimble on August 23, 2018, 08:08:10 AM
Imagine a nickel-iron asteroid like this tugged into orbit around Earth and anchoring a space elevator.

my first thought upon reading the line, "and might, one day in the far future, pose an impact threat" was, 'or a lot sooner when the attempt to bring it into a closer Earth orbit goes horribly wrong'
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on August 23, 2018, 12:12:48 PM
Imagine a nickel-iron asteroid like this tugged into orbit around Earth and anchoring a space elevator.

my first thought upon reading the line, "and might, one day in the far future, pose an impact threat" was, 'or a lot sooner when the attempt to bring it into a closer Earth orbit goes horribly wrong'
"What could possibly go wrong?"
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on August 24, 2018, 01:21:53 AM
See, I was thinking that a bunch of open core fission reactors could use asteroid material as reaction mass to push it in an earth-lunar conveyor orbit. Mining, transit, science, and cool-as-heck all in one.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on August 24, 2018, 06:20:50 AM
See, I was thinking that a bunch of open core fission reactors could use asteroid material as reaction mass to push it in an earth-lunar conveyor orbit. Mining, transit, science, and cool-as-heck all in one.
If  you're not in rush "gravity tugs" would be safer. Have a mass in a triangular relationship with the asteroid and Earth. The mass gives a slight pull to the asteroid and, if managed properly, the big rock goes into a different orbit.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on August 24, 2018, 12:17:57 PM
Safer in what sense? I mean space is already radioactive as hell. Mining out a big asteroid would provide good shielding from that and from the reactors. You'd want active engines for a conveyor, I think, since the mass of the thing would be constantly changing as the asteroid is mined out and turned into a habitat.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on August 24, 2018, 05:31:47 PM
Safer in what sense? I mean space is already radioactive as hell. Mining out a big asteroid would provide good shielding from that and from the reactors. You'd want active engines for a conveyor, I think, since the mass of the thing would be constantly changing as the asteroid is mined out and turned into a habitat.
In the sense that you don't need so much equipment and you have time to adjust the trajectory if it looks to be going wonky.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on August 24, 2018, 11:16:44 PM
Sensible if you're just aiming to be close but not TOO close. :)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on August 25, 2018, 05:43:54 AM
Sensible if you're just aiming to be close but not TOO close. :)
The most important thing would be to get-r-done before any government got involved.  :-[
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on August 25, 2018, 09:59:43 PM
I think it's clear that (in these kinds of domains) governments are admirably slow.  >:D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on September 03, 2018, 07:27:18 PM
(https://i.redd.it/apaob0owjyj11.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Calinthalus on September 06, 2018, 09:27:32 AM
(https://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/1536238906-20180906.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on September 06, 2018, 07:16:27 PM
Is there anyone reading this thread who isn't already subscribed to SMBC?  :D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on September 06, 2018, 09:23:51 PM
/me Slowly and cautiously raises his hand.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: HighPockets on September 06, 2018, 10:03:02 PM
/me Slowly and cautiously raises his hand.

Ok, cus, he did. Raises hand too.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on September 06, 2018, 10:08:09 PM
I'm not
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on September 06, 2018, 10:15:48 PM
Get on that, you guys. SMBC is practically mandatory reading for anyone who calls themself a skeptic.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on September 06, 2018, 10:58:49 PM
It really is stunningly good. There is almost always hovertext and a red button bonus comic panel too.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on September 06, 2018, 11:28:03 PM
I use my Motorola for almost everything, so "hover text" is a downside for me. Every time I will know I'm missing something.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Calinthalus on September 07, 2018, 06:03:36 AM
I'm subscribed in my RSS feed reader, the hovertext is always printed below the cartoon in case you're on a device that can't hover.  I don't know if that's the case on the actual site or not.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 07, 2018, 07:52:39 AM
I can never get the challenge question.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on September 07, 2018, 04:03:15 PM
I'm subscribed in my RSS feed reader, the hovertext is always printed below the cartoon in case you're on a device that can't hover.  I don't know if that's the case on the actual site or not.

You can tap the image to have the hover pop up.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 09, 2018, 01:11:49 AM
(https://i.redd.it/gqpgqsjif4l11.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on September 09, 2018, 08:08:58 PM
Oh no! The sun sets? This could be the fatal blow for solar energy. Why has nobody in the solar industry ever considered this before?

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on September 09, 2018, 11:06:25 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/YBq6M5d.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on September 10, 2018, 12:42:35 AM
(click to show/hide)

DHMO is nothing. It's all the hydric acid you really have to worry about.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gebobs on September 10, 2018, 02:28:12 PM
Oh no! The sun sets? This could be the fatal blow for solar energy. Why has nobody in the solar industry ever considered this before?

Wind dies. Sun sets.

But coal kills like it's nobody's business.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on September 10, 2018, 02:55:40 PM
(click to show/hide)

DHMO is nothing. It's all the hydric acid you really have to worry about.

That plus the oxidane is enough to kill you.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 10, 2018, 03:55:58 PM
(click to show/hide)

DHMO is nothing. It's all the hydric acid you really have to worry about.
Just remember, no acid has a pH higher than water.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on September 10, 2018, 04:55:03 PM
Thank god that there is a group like Oxidane.org (http://oxidane.org/index.html) to help us understand the dangers!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 10, 2018, 06:00:37 PM
(click to show/hide)

DHMO is nothing. It's all the hydric acid you really have to worry about.

That plus the oxidane is enough to kill you.

Oh please, all that stuff is completely diluted by all that water.  ::)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on September 10, 2018, 06:35:02 PM
(click to show/hide)

DHMO is nothing. It's all the hydric acid you really have to worry about.

That plus the oxidane is enough to kill you.

Oh please, all that stuff is completely diluted by all that water.  ::)

That just makes it stronger.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on September 10, 2018, 11:12:09 PM
*GASP*
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on September 11, 2018, 04:29:23 PM
(click to show/hide)

DHMO is nothing. It's all the hydric acid you really have to worry about.

That is the same stuff that is in jet chemtrails.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on September 11, 2018, 09:47:40 PM
(click to show/hide)

DHMO is nothing. It's all the hydric acid you really have to worry about.

That is the same stuff that is in jet chemtrails.

3 words: Nuclear Reactor coolant.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on September 11, 2018, 11:20:54 PM
You people are scaring me. Good thing I only drink coffee and whisky. Keeps me safe!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Alex Simmons on September 12, 2018, 01:09:16 AM
You people are scaring me. Good thing I only drink coffee and whisky. Keeps me safe!
To make matters worse, it's bipolar.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on September 12, 2018, 09:04:33 AM
What I want to know is why the government has it pumped right into our homes!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 12, 2018, 11:19:15 AM
What I want to know is why the government has it pumped right into our homes!
The mind control element, dude! Once people start on the stuff they have to have it and will do damn near anything to get it. And the government controls supply and distribution. Think about that. /alexjones
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on September 12, 2018, 12:07:26 PM
What I want to know is why the government has it pumped right into our homes!

They found the stuff on Mars and Mars is a dead planet. Not saying, just sayin.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 12, 2018, 01:24:08 PM
I've heard that it is one of the prime components in acid rain, as well as the most dominant greenhouse gas on earth.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 12, 2018, 01:36:33 PM
You'd think the government would wake up when there's clouds of the shit floating around and SOLID CHUNKS OF IT FALLING FROM THE SKY!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on September 12, 2018, 02:04:57 PM
I find it interesting that none of it seems to fall on Saudi Arabia.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on September 12, 2018, 02:42:29 PM
You'd think the government would wake up when there's clouds of the shit floating around and SOLID CHUNKS OF IT FALLING FROM THE SKY!!!!!!!

and you can die by just inhaling a tiny amount.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Redamare on September 12, 2018, 06:46:12 PM
I'm just got tested and it's showing up in my blood and urine!  :(
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 12, 2018, 08:17:39 PM
Holy shit, well I just checked an instrument I bought that is supposed to detect this stuff in the air in my house and apparently it's at like 70% of saturation! I don't know what it was that set off the Illuminati type folks but I guess I'm a target now. }|8o#
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 13, 2018, 07:20:55 AM
I find it interesting that none of it seems to fall on Saudi Arabia.
Gotta keep the sand worms somewhere.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Calinthalus on September 13, 2018, 08:11:09 AM
Holy shit, well I just checked an instrument I bought that is supposed to detect this stuff in the air in my house and apparently it's at like 70% of saturation! I don't know what it was that set off the Illuminati type folks but I guess I'm a target now. }|8o#
My house is nowhere near that high.  But I do have a little wooden box that seems to stay around 74%...I keep my poisonous flammable plant sticks in there.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 13, 2018, 08:14:34 AM
Holy shit, well I just checked an instrument I bought that is supposed to detect this stuff in the air in my house and apparently it's at like 70% of saturation! I don't know what it was that set off the Illuminati type folks but I guess I'm a target now. }|8o#
My house is nowhere near that high.  But I do have a little wooden box that seems to stay around 74%...I keep my poisonous flammable plant sticks in there.
"Sometimes a poisonous flammable plant stick is just a poisonous flammable plant stick."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Calinthalus on September 13, 2018, 08:18:30 AM
Holy shit, well I just checked an instrument I bought that is supposed to detect this stuff in the air in my house and apparently it's at like 70% of saturation! I don't know what it was that set off the Illuminati type folks but I guess I'm a target now. }|8o#
My house is nowhere near that high.  But I do have a little wooden box that seems to stay around 74%...I keep my poisonous flammable plant sticks in there.
"Sometimes a poisonous flammable plant stick is just a poisonous flammable plant stick."
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BNzYwMjc3ODEzOV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwNTI1NDM1._V1_UY317_CR9,0,214,317_AL_.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: fred.slota on September 13, 2018, 02:40:11 PM
Acid and contrails and greenhouse gases...   That's nothing...


Consider this: Every single water molecule contains two Hydrogen atoms separated by an Oxygen atom.  Should that Oxygen atom fail, there is nothing preventing a fusion reaction generating a thermonuclear detonation.

Water.   Liquid solar hellfire.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on September 13, 2018, 03:25:48 PM
Wait, who was talking about water? This is about DHMO.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on September 13, 2018, 03:27:16 PM
Wait, who was talking about water? This is about DHMO.

Yes the stuff that Monsanto uses to grow their crops.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: HighPockets on September 13, 2018, 05:03:13 PM
Wait, who was talking about water? This is about DHMO.

Yes the stuff that Monsanto uses to grow their crops.

[pedant] Monsanto doesn't grow crops, farmers do, they just provide the seeds (and roundup) [\pedant]
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 13, 2018, 05:40:39 PM
Wait, who was talking about water? This is about DHMO.

Yes the stuff that Monsanto uses to grow their crops.

[pedant] Monsanto doesn't grow crops, farmers do, they just provide the seeds (and roundup) [\pedant]
They have really big green houses on their facility here in St. Louis.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: fred.slota on September 13, 2018, 06:02:42 PM
[pedant]'E's not growin'! 'E's passed on! This company is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace!   If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!!He's f*ckin' snuffed it!..... THIS IS AN EX-COMPANY!!

Now BAYER...[/pedant]
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 13, 2018, 06:13:35 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiMf06GthU4

Highlight @ 19:03 - 19:21.  Describes process of using bushes and grasses to revert desert to grassland.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 14, 2018, 01:17:14 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ahurL2Jk4E
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 14, 2018, 05:01:34 AM
The water was turning to steam as it hit that sucker. Gotta ride it out.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on September 14, 2018, 10:30:36 AM
Wait, who was talking about water? This is about DHMO.

Yes the stuff that Monsanto uses to grow their crops.

[pedant] Monsanto doesn't grow crops, farmers do, they just provide the seeds (and roundup) [\pedant]

I only say that Monsanto does it because of the mind control effects of their GMO gluten.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on September 27, 2018, 02:11:39 PM
(https://vicskeptics.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/lynne-kelly-skeptic-guide-quote-1200w.jpg)

I assume that the originator is this Lynne Kelly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynne_Kelly_(science_writer)), Australian skeptic.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 27, 2018, 02:38:39 PM
Too subtle for religious folks.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on September 27, 2018, 02:45:39 PM
(https://vicskeptics.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/lynne-kelly-skeptic-guide-quote-1200w.jpg)

I assume that the originator is this Lynne Kelly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynne_Kelly_(science_writer)), Australian skeptic.


That is all good and well until you realize that the person beside you is only making one set of footprints in the sand which is proof that God is actually carrying him.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on September 27, 2018, 03:04:29 PM
(https://vicskeptics.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/lynne-kelly-skeptic-guide-quote-1200w.jpg)

I assume that the originator is this Lynne Kelly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynne_Kelly_(science_writer)), Australian skeptic.


That is all good and well until you realize that the person beside you is only making one set of footprints in the sand which is proof that God is actually carrying him.

(https://fsmedia.imgix.net/c1/46/7d/65/027d/48cf/bf7e/c64f7fbcc24b/luke-skywalkers-shoes-no-footprints.png?auto=format%2Ccompress&w=650)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 27, 2018, 04:27:12 PM
"I'll always be with you..."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on October 02, 2018, 01:57:28 PM
(https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/a1Qp5EP_460swp.webp)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on October 27, 2018, 05:01:33 AM
(http://images6.fanpop.com/image/photos/38200000/Things-Carl-Sagan-Taught-Me-carl-sagan-38289906-1024-707.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on October 28, 2018, 07:55:56 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/3T813o9.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on October 28, 2018, 09:11:34 PM
That guy needs a Hawaiian shirt.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on October 30, 2018, 02:47:55 PM
(https://alwaysquestionauthority.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/1469926_779685588723537_981205669_n.png)

Something we should all try to keep in mind everyday.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on November 01, 2018, 11:17:23 AM
(https://alwaysquestionauthority.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/1469926_779685588723537_981205669_n.png)

Something we should all try to keep in mind everyday.

I don't know if this is true. It can be but it certainly isn't a given. I know plenty of people that don't believe in God that don't live life to the fullest and a few that have taken their lives. The opposite is true with believers. Just because I know I am going to eventually get a new car doesn't mean I am going to pinball my current one off trees and treat it like crap. If tomorrow they figured out how at the end of our lives to load who we are into a computer so that we could live indefinitely in a computer universe doesn't mean that I would live all that different or that my current life would have less meaning.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on November 01, 2018, 01:18:05 PM
"You don't mess around wasting your time in this life because you expect to have another one" is true of people who don't believe in an afterlife, whether or not those people still in fact mess around wasting time in this life. If you don't believe in an afterlife, then whatever you do now can't possibly be "because you expect to have another [life]".
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on November 01, 2018, 03:21:18 PM
"You don't mess around wasting your time in this life because you expect to have another one" is true of people who don't believe in an afterlife, whether or not those people still in fact mess around wasting time in this life. If you don't believe in an afterlife, then whatever you do now can't possibly be "because you expect to have another [life]".

That is a Kellyanne Conway way of spinning it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on November 01, 2018, 05:37:39 PM
(https://alwaysquestionauthority.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/1469926_779685588723537_981205669_n.png)

Something we should all try to keep in mind everyday.

I don't know if this is true. It can be but it certainly isn't a given. I know plenty of people that don't believe in God that don't live life to the fullest and a few that have taken their lives. The opposite is true with believers. Just because I know I am going to eventually get a new car doesn't mean I am going to pinball my current one off trees and treat it like crap. If tomorrow they figured out how at the end of our lives to load who we are into a computer so that we could live indefinitely in a computer universe doesn't mean that I would live all that different or that my current life would have less meaning.

I agree. That's why I added my comment. ;)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on November 04, 2018, 09:34:51 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/45PDHS6.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on November 05, 2018, 06:38:42 AM
I seen the WTC conspirators' math described as thermodumbnamics.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on November 05, 2018, 08:09:35 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/iAJpokI.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on November 05, 2018, 10:27:30 AM
OMG
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on November 05, 2018, 12:58:31 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/iAJpokI.jpg)

Took me a second. Morbidly funny.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on November 06, 2018, 11:50:27 AM
(https://philosophicalswag.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/neil-degrasse-tyson-i-am-driven-by-two.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on November 07, 2018, 10:57:59 AM
I hope this doesn't break anything...

(http://www.relativelyinteresting.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/solar-system-explained-infographic.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on November 07, 2018, 02:31:03 PM
(http://rationalia.com/gawdzilla/scrolling%20speeding.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on November 21, 2018, 02:08:15 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/pzwBeFa.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on November 21, 2018, 08:51:40 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/rW9wOr7.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on December 01, 2018, 12:38:36 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/4BwBqDI.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 02, 2018, 03:52:37 PM
(https://i.redd.it/t3o2pqvdht121.jpg)

(Air assume sea-level density)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on December 02, 2018, 04:42:53 PM
Add to my collection.  :)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Gigabyte on December 03, 2018, 03:49:15 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=20&v=SsR_fRDIQXk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: swan on December 03, 2018, 05:22:14 PM
(http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/1543681019-20181201%20(2).png)

Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal (http://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/secrets)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gebobs on December 06, 2018, 12:53:11 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=20&v=SsR_fRDIQXk

https://youtu.be/NJZqREPc9k0
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on December 06, 2018, 01:05:53 PM
Been there, done that

Surprised the lights stayed on as long as they did, and came back so quickly.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on December 12, 2018, 06:27:20 AM
188 Cognitive Biases in One Image from: VisualCapitalist.com

(http://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/cognitive-bias.jpg) (https://www.visualcapitalist.com/every-single-cognitive-bias/)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on December 16, 2018, 09:00:33 AM
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/205851496007467009/501134495563513866/Screenshot_2018-10-14_Florida_Democrat_Invokes_Blood_of_Jesus_Against_Witches_Warlocks_Seeking_to_Ha.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on December 16, 2018, 07:00:13 PM
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/205851496007467009/501134495563513866/Screenshot_2018-10-14_Florida_Democrat_Invokes_Blood_of_Jesus_Against_Witches_Warlocks_Seeking_to_Ha.png)

I'm always surprised when people find this sort of thing surprising. This was de rigeur for the church I was in. Completely normal and expected. I keep having to remind myself that other people might not be used to the idea.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on December 19, 2018, 08:43:30 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/Lt3IE0u.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on December 26, 2018, 04:56:15 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/Lt3IE0u.jpg)

That's not spaghetti, man. That would have to be due to some other god.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on December 26, 2018, 05:33:36 PM
Godzilla fought Rotini and lost!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on December 26, 2018, 08:07:14 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/Lt3IE0u.jpg)

That's not spaghetti, man. That would have to be due to some other god.

They're called pastafarians, man, they don't discriminate.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on December 27, 2018, 01:04:14 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/Lt3IE0u.jpg)

That's not spaghetti, man. That would have to be due to some other god.

They're called pastafarians, man, they don't discriminate.

I am just saying that if this is proof that the god created life it wouldn't be a spaghetti god. I have no problem with worshiping the entire Pantheon but you shouldn't give credit to Hera for something Zeus did.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 28, 2018, 10:54:14 PM
edit: Nevermind
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on December 30, 2018, 09:41:29 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/zLUQugw.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on January 02, 2019, 11:25:22 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/O3CfzHt.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on January 03, 2019, 09:40:15 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/O3CfzHt.gif)
Mercury got whacked.

I'll reserve my opinion about Uranus.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on January 03, 2019, 11:21:57 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/sDuUPUr.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on January 05, 2019, 10:57:07 AM
Perpetuum mobile.

(http://i.imgur.com/jNGQuMt.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on January 05, 2019, 11:22:38 AM
Perception hampers reality?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on January 05, 2019, 07:52:04 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/B1LQwu3.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on January 05, 2019, 07:53:27 PM
Tardigrade?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on January 05, 2019, 07:56:54 PM
not animating.  >:(
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on January 06, 2019, 05:15:59 AM
not animating.  >:(
https://i.imgur.com/B1LQwu3.gifv
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on January 06, 2019, 12:02:44 PM
My mind keeps flipping it from on its back to on its front.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on January 06, 2019, 02:34:09 PM
My mind keeps flipping it from on its back to on its front.
The legs wouldn't have been so clear. The body mass would have obscured them. As it is it's not hard to see the crotch.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on January 15, 2019, 10:58:10 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/zM41BNL.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on January 15, 2019, 11:12:30 PM
That's very cool.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on January 19, 2019, 11:05:26 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/EjKLlIj.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on January 19, 2019, 12:24:32 PM
Without knowing what is being cultured and why the growth rate is different, I'm not sure how to interpret that last one.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on January 19, 2019, 12:32:09 PM
I assumed it had to do with penicillin-resistant bacteria.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on January 19, 2019, 01:49:27 PM
Nevermind; I see now that the circles represent absence of growth, and that the central spots are antibiotics.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on January 19, 2019, 08:04:29 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/rJqn6Dy.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on January 20, 2019, 05:15:38 PM
I suppose that’s cool for scale, but I’m completely distracted by the fact that light travels far too fast to orbit at the surface of the Earth. It would be able to orbit less than a centimeter from the center of mass of the earth (and Earth would therefore have to be a black hole).
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 20, 2019, 11:19:56 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICv6GLwt1gM
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on January 22, 2019, 12:54:26 PM
I suppose that’s cool for scale, but I’m completely distracted by the fact that light travels far too fast to orbit at the surface of the Earth. It would be able to orbit less than a centimeter from the center of mass of the earth (and Earth would therefore have to be a black hole).
You could imagine it being reflected or in an optical cable or something, though admittedly it still wouldn't technically be an "orbit".

Also, photons can orbit at 1.5 times the Schwarzschild radius (of a neutral unmoving spherical distribution of mass), and I'm pretty certain it would be impossible for any sort of matter that obeys Relativity to be smaller than that without collapsing into a black hole.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 22, 2019, 03:12:23 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/zGcFTuZ.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on January 22, 2019, 03:15:39 PM
Also, photons can orbit at 1.5 times the Schwarzschild radius (of a neutral unmoving spherical distribution of mass), and I'm pretty certain it would be impossible for any sort of matter that obeys Relativity to be smaller than that without collapsing into a black hole.

Which is, I think, what I said? I may have been slightly off on the orbital radius of a 1c object (it would actually be around 1.2 cm), but I hardly think that changes my point.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Ron Obvious on January 22, 2019, 08:37:02 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/MfFBAvC.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on January 24, 2019, 11:14:32 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/3zDJKTu.gif)
https://i.imgur.com/3zDJKTu.mp4
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on January 24, 2019, 11:59:02 PM
ETA never mind, didn't work
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on January 25, 2019, 07:41:18 AM
Also, photons can orbit at 1.5 times the Schwarzschild radius (of a neutral unmoving spherical distribution of mass), and I'm pretty certain it would be impossible for any sort of matter that obeys Relativity to be smaller than that without collapsing into a black hole.

Which is, I think, what I said? I may have been slightly off on the orbital radius of a 1c object (it would actually be around 1.2 cm), but I hardly think that changes my point.
The wording of your post made it seem like you were saying Earth in particular would have to be a black hole for light to orbit, rather than that black holes are the only possible things light could orbit.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on January 25, 2019, 11:22:28 AM
Also, photons can orbit at 1.5 times the Schwarzschild radius (of a neutral unmoving spherical distribution of mass), and I'm pretty certain it would be impossible for any sort of matter that obeys Relativity to be smaller than that without collapsing into a black hole.

Which is, I think, what I said? I may have been slightly off on the orbital radius of a 1c object (it would actually be around 1.2 cm), but I hardly think that changes my point.
The wording of your post made it seem like you were saying Earth in particular would have to be a black hole for light to orbit, rather than that black holes are the only possible things light could orbit.

I don't think that's a reasonable interpretation of my words. I spoke only of the Earth because I was discussing the deficiencies of a particular image of light 'orbiting' Earth.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on January 31, 2019, 04:19:58 PM
(https://i.redd.it/codu28ptdqd21.png)

That skull is a hero.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on January 31, 2019, 05:10:49 PM
LOL "it is reported". By whom? Your momma?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 01, 2019, 04:42:53 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/etUxUfK.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Billzbub on February 01, 2019, 10:20:59 PM
Where was that during our Pokemon mafia game?!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 02, 2019, 09:00:54 PM
Right?!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 03, 2019, 10:19:25 AM
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-bZx11z7q_EM/U1dDxWbhiRI/AAAAAAAAUdE/G6myWdmU-hg/w1920-h1080/The-Sagan-Series-Pale-Blue-Dot-1.jpg)

Words to live by. Unfortunately, collectively as a species, we are not taking good care of the pale blue dot. We are making a clusterfuck out of it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 03, 2019, 03:09:47 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn4MsudXUAEXmTF.jpg)

Sounds like the Donald. Also sounds like Putin and Erdogan, and probably others I can't think of right now.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Billzbub on February 04, 2019, 12:53:09 PM
I think the wrong passage is highlighted there.  The last paragraph is the most powerful and relevant to today's world in my opinion.  The polarization of political dogma is now extreme, and the last paragraph describes why it will be so difficult for the world to recover.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on February 05, 2019, 01:10:20 PM
https://www.facebook.com/theUltimatefighterr/videos/352490451756435/
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on February 05, 2019, 01:10:42 PM
I see a dolphin!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4TU3arrZR8
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 07, 2019, 02:21:15 AM
https://vimeo.com/315487551

From single-cell to Newt in six minutes.  Fascinating little video.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on February 08, 2019, 09:49:45 PM
Zebra fish Nervous system growing over 16 hours:
https://giant.gfycat.com/AdoredRemoteBobcat.webm
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 09, 2019, 08:59:49 AM
Zebra fish Nervous system growing over 16 hours:

False advertising! Beware! Only 40 seconds long!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on February 10, 2019, 07:42:21 PM
(https://i.redd.it/pyg9doiritf21.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 11, 2019, 08:12:15 AM
For a split second I thought the signature said "Martian Intelligence".
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 11, 2019, 09:05:16 AM
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/205851496007467009/539227370746282034/FB_IMG_1548617721454.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/UtNUTkK.jpg)

Oh, and also:

(http://i.imgur.com/cNg3IZ9.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 13, 2019, 06:27:00 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/n2Sb5XP.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on February 13, 2019, 09:11:44 PM
That reminds me of a warning label I saw once which read "Please be advised that any use of this product will increase the amount of entropy in the universe. While no responsibility is implied, users are warned that this will eventually lead to the heat death of the universe."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 15, 2019, 10:39:38 AM
(https://66.media.tumblr.com/335efd8d063b9e1100dd4765c6e12276/tumblr_oc8nwaqAra1qf07h2o1_500.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 15, 2019, 11:58:29 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/bKeHhS5.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 16, 2019, 04:26:28 PM
(http://www.wakingtimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Expanding-Earth.jpg)

Neal Adams would be proud. Actually, who knows, maybe he made it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 16, 2019, 07:56:35 PM
God does balloon animals?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 17, 2019, 08:56:01 AM
Yes, but only terrified pufferfish.

(http://i.imgur.com/WH4QwITl.jpg)

EDIT:

Also:

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-V_mr1vtkSeY/VUo-zrrn1MI/AAAAAAAAUFI/trVAc_rT6Hc/s1600/07aef80249fd17aa63e1%5B1%5D.jpg)

Mystery solved.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on February 17, 2019, 11:39:59 PM
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-V_mr1vtkSeY/VUo-zrrn1MI/AAAAAAAAUFI/trVAc_rT6Hc/s1600/07aef80249fd17aa63e1%5B1%5D.jpg)

Mystery solved.

Yay, science!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 20, 2019, 02:12:12 PM
https://twitter.com/ReskiLab/status/1097744480361418753
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on February 20, 2019, 08:33:12 PM
Building the ISS

https://i.imgur.com/uEeChpf.mp4
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 21, 2019, 12:10:35 AM
Building the ISS

VOLTRON!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 21, 2019, 09:10:08 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/nMXdXSO.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on February 22, 2019, 11:24:05 PM
(https://i.redd.it/jxxlummyu8i21.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 23, 2019, 07:01:39 AM
Building the ISS

https://i.imgur.com/uEeChpf.mp4
Okay, so where are our flying cars?  ;D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2019, 07:22:20 AM
(https://i.redd.it/jxxlummyu8i21.jpg)

A lovely picture. From where is it taken?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Calinthalus on February 23, 2019, 08:53:00 AM
(https://i.redd.it/jxxlummyu8i21.jpg)

A lovely picture. From where is it taken?
My backyard....
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 23, 2019, 08:54:13 AM
(https://i.redd.it/jxxlummyu8i21.jpg)

A lovely picture. From where is it taken?
A rover.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2019, 09:25:20 AM
(https://i.redd.it/jxxlummyu8i21.jpg)

A lovely picture. From where is it taken?
A rover.

That was located?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 23, 2019, 10:23:41 AM
Right where it took the picture.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2019, 10:57:50 AM
Ok, I've had enough of you.

I don't understand why people here feel they have a lisence to be rude to me without me being rude.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 23, 2019, 11:06:28 AM
They were teasing.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 23, 2019, 11:32:40 AM
Where are you going?  Out.

When are you going to be back?  Later.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 23, 2019, 12:50:15 PM
They were teasing.
Seriously. I mean, where do we have cameras that can take pictures of the Earth and have a hilly skyline in the picture?

If you look carefully you'll see Mark Watney driving by.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on February 23, 2019, 01:55:17 PM
(click to show/hide)

A lovely picture. From where is it taken?
A rover.

That was located?

Mars.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 23, 2019, 02:37:38 PM
Hey! No spoilers!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: swan on February 23, 2019, 03:50:52 PM
Ok, I've had enough of you.

I don't understand why people here feel they have a lisence to be rude to me without me being rude.

Sadly, the best way to get an answer out of someone on the Internet is to simply post the wrong answer yourself: The desire to simply be a dick is always outweighed by the need to prove how much smarter they are than someone else.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 23, 2019, 04:07:22 PM
Ok, I've had enough of you.

I don't understand why people here feel they have a lisence to be rude to me without me being rude.

Sadly, the best way to get an answer out of someone on the Internet is to simply post the wrong answer yourself: The desire to simply be a dick is always outweighed by the need to prove how much smarter they are than someone else.
You have to admit that dumb questions will get hilarious answers.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on February 23, 2019, 05:17:18 PM
Ok, I've had enough of you.

I don't understand why people here feel they have a lisence to be rude to me without me being rude.

Sadly, the best way to get an answer out of someone on the Internet is to simply post the wrong answer yourself: The desire to simply be a dick is always outweighed by the need to prove how much smarter they are than someone else.
Actually that’s not true. The best way to get an answer is to ... oh, wait ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on February 23, 2019, 05:27:13 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/cxfTcw4.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on February 23, 2019, 07:36:00 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBVoxwwGlnc
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: lonely moa on February 24, 2019, 03:08:23 AM
Climate Science, 1995.  Ice Stream D, WAIS.


(https://i.imgur.com/xlKp657.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: DamoET on February 25, 2019, 05:49:45 AM
  My fantastic wife has been hassling me for years to get a tattoo.  She gave me a voucher for fathers day, which was non refundable.  Being permanent (as tattoos seem to be) I wanted it to be something which was meaningful to me and reflect part of what I believe I am, so I settled on this, with the kids names added.


(https://scontent.fsyd5-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/52778895_2554775021218734_7781377277354311680_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&_nc_ht=scontent.fsyd5-1.fna&oh=4ebbe58334dcb9b65215dcfb366960ef&oe=5D1D84BF)


Damien

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 25, 2019, 06:54:05 AM
Clever.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on February 26, 2019, 07:04:19 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/taSfk8r.jpg)

Damn scientiscians, holding back astronauts left and right.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on February 26, 2019, 02:24:44 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/09dmT1z.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on February 26, 2019, 04:00:48 PM
https://youtu.be/cNT5yAqpBmI
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on February 27, 2019, 11:21:50 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/HAwoU6hg.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on March 01, 2019, 11:57:42 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/bh6L8rS.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on March 02, 2019, 11:13:57 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/1zSX9DW.png)
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on March 03, 2019, 06:59:21 AM
What magnification?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Gigabyte on March 06, 2019, 02:03:53 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/HAwoU6hg.jpg)

That is very cool

(https://qphl.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-31aa02b20e98337fa2cc0578344716c6.webp)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 07, 2019, 03:45:47 PM
(http://www.rednecktek.net/misc/yeti-warning%20(800x450).jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on March 09, 2019, 12:00:59 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/iqQ7UGL.png)

That small dot is us.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on March 09, 2019, 05:29:53 AM
Weird! It looks like Saturn.




 ;D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 10, 2019, 10:07:40 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/yegjvJn.jpg)

(https://arstechnica.com/civis/download/file.php?id=42227)

(https://arstechnica.com/civis/download/file.php?id=42225)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 15, 2019, 08:27:12 PM
Look at it from a little distance.

(http://i.imgur.com/GWVgey8.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: swan on March 16, 2019, 12:26:53 PM
(https://forum.level1techs.com/uploads/default/original/3X/6/6/66fd7ab2c9a6d5de11a3b4fae553b6c322a742a2.jpeg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 16, 2019, 01:14:33 PM
(https://arstechnica.com/civis/download/file.php?id=43039)

(https://images-cdn.9gag.com/photo/aADb3DR_460s.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on March 20, 2019, 02:13:48 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUW51lvIFjg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUW51lvIFjg)

Astronomy Picture of the Day (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)
Quote
Explanation: Welcome to an equinox on planet Earth. Today is the first day of spring in our fair planet's northern hemisphere, fall in the southern hemisphere, with day and night nearly equal around the globe. At an equinox Earth's terminator, the dividing line between day and night, connects the planet's north and south poles as seen at the start of this remarkable time-lapse video compressing an entire year into twelve seconds. To make it, the Meteosat satellite recorded these infrared images every day at the same local time from a geosynchronous orbit. The video actually starts at the September 2010 equinox with the terminator aligned vertically. As the Earth revolves around the Sun, the terminator tilts to provide less daily sunlight to the northern hemisphere, reaching the solstice and northern hemisphere winter at the maximum tilt. As the year continues, the terminator tilts back again and March 2011 equinox arrives halfway through the video. Then the terminator swings past vertical the other way, reaching the the June 2011 solstice and the beginning of northern summer. The video ends as the September equinox returns.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on March 24, 2019, 11:01:49 PM
(https://i.redd.it/gumx37380mn21.jpg)
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on March 26, 2019, 09:42:11 AM
(https://scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/55776268_2038563866256211_8730305917213474816_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_ht=scontent-lht6-1.xx&oh=d9ad36b33b61f6d5f675fa8c3e68ba77&oe=5D143A7C)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on March 26, 2019, 10:51:08 PM
https://www.evogeneao.com/explore/tree-of-life-explorer
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on March 26, 2019, 10:55:52 PM
https://www.evogeneao.com/explore/tree-of-life-explorer
I love that image - but my first thought is that mammals are grossly overrepresented, mostly at the expense of birds.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on March 27, 2019, 02:04:59 AM
https://www.evogeneao.com/explore/tree-of-life-explorer
I love that image - but my first thought is that mammals are grossly overrepresented, mostly at the expense of birds.

My first thought was that the diversity of Bacteria and Archaea was significantly underrepresented.

They actually have a page that does a pretty good job of explaining the biases that have been built into the image: https://www.evogeneao.com/learn/tree-of-life
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 27, 2019, 08:52:06 AM
Birds schmirds... Do you see that single branch named "beetles"?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: seamas on March 27, 2019, 01:51:40 PM
Look at it from a little distance.

(http://i.imgur.com/GWVgey8.jpg)

I hope it is a self portrait, but I suspect it is the image of the Lark messiah and was partially funded by the bird NEA and it is completely making the devout bird catholics very, very angry.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 28, 2019, 05:35:51 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/yzWmnBd.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 29, 2019, 10:17:08 AM
Good old reliable physics.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/OW51ZyBgEsK9W/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on March 29, 2019, 10:40:03 AM
I would have gone mileys and mileys to watch that live. Perhaps all the way to Montana.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: DevoutCatalyst on March 29, 2019, 11:13:14 AM
女仆罪恶美国

(https://i.imgur.com/yzWmnBd.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on March 29, 2019, 01:48:36 PM
(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/industry_nicknames.png)
(click to show/hide)


Alternative Literature (https://xkcd.com/)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 29, 2019, 05:29:50 PM
女仆罪恶美国

(https://i.imgur.com/yzWmnBd.jpg)

American maid sin?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Calinthalus on March 29, 2019, 05:49:47 PM
女仆罪恶美国

(https://i.imgur.com/yzWmnBd.jpg)

American maid sin?
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/p__/images/9/9f/Americanmaid.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20160729131532&path-prefix=protagonist)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on March 30, 2019, 11:18:56 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/OIDj7Lm.jpg)
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on March 31, 2019, 07:41:01 AM
Eugene Spafford was just a kid. No wonder Purdue isn't on that map.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 31, 2019, 12:40:26 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/vabbDcL.jpg)

EDIT:

And also:

(https://i.imgur.com/kRlGVrDl.jpg)

EDIT 2:

And because I'm bipartisan on the whole Wars/Trek issue:

(https://i.imgur.com/lkyJw3k.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on March 31, 2019, 06:35:00 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/QykJjOnm.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on April 01, 2019, 01:13:16 PM
(https://metvcdn.metv.com/uobdN-1475170525-1154-blog-Header.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on April 01, 2019, 03:49:51 PM
(https://world.greekreporter.com/files/shipwreck-e1552919119376.jpg)

https://world.greekreporter.com/2019/03/18/egyptian-shipwreck-proves-greek-historian-herodotus-right-after-2500-years/


AfricaArchaeologyMiddle EastEgyptNews
Egyptian Shipwreck Proves Greek Historian Herodotus Right — After 2,500 Years
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: TheMatrixDNA on April 03, 2019, 12:21:40 AM
I have asking me why and how humans domesticated wolves. Living in Amazon jungle for 7 years and observing things there I concluded that all social systems that humans has created till now ( be it communism, monarchy, feudalism, capitalism, etc.) are just copies of the jungle division of power among animals. So, the first humans with preys as cows noticed that wolves were doing a good job for them. Like the lions permits the existence of wolves surrounding their territories because wolves help to keep the order in his reign, the cows doesn't escape due fear of the wolves, etc. The wolves were the first security, the foreman... the first middle class...

So, the first humans did it because the inherited instincts from non-rational animals  were being transformed into human intelligence...


Am I wrong? Why?   
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 03, 2019, 07:03:42 AM
More likely, "puppies are cute" was the motivator. Hunter kills Mom, takes one or pups home to the kids. Second place would be wolves scavenging and becoming accustomed to being around humans to the point when the two species were willing to be in proximity.

And always remember "a dog is a wolf with the interesting parts bred out of it."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Billzbub on April 03, 2019, 12:50:57 PM
More likely, "puppies are cute" was the motivator. Hunter kills Mom, takes one or pups home to the kids. Second place would be wolves scavenging and becoming accustomed to being around humans to the point when the two species were willing to be in proximity.

And always remember "a dog is a wolf with the interesting parts bred out of it."

That's an answer to the first question about why we domesticated them.  But I think the rest of the post is asking what we think about the idea that our social structures are based on the social structures already present in nature but with some human intelligence applied.  The way it was worded seems to imply a lot of anthropomorphism, but I don't think it was intended that way.  Animals have an evolved nature that causes their social structures, and so do we.  How similar are our social structures to animal ones?

I'm happy to restate the question, but I have no answers.  This might be best in a thread of its own.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 03, 2019, 01:22:08 PM
I think our most basic social structures are very similar to the more intelligent animals. We certainly share traits with the great apes.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on April 03, 2019, 01:26:27 PM
I'd question division of 'animal instinct' from 'human intelligence'

We're primates doing generic primate stuff except with:I only ever took Intro to Sociology and have never touched anything about the study of systems but I expect you could define basic elements of human behavior and social structures, show how you can get complex behavior/systems out of those simple basal elements and then also identify those same elements all throughout nature and just in systems in general.

Like, evolution is a general systems thing.  It's filtered variation.  Any system subject to (1) self-replication forward through time and (2) variation will display evolutionary change/behavior.  This applies to human bodies, bread recipes, tire designs and pigeon behavior all the same.  It's a general 'systems' thing. 

I expect a great deal of what we think of as 'human' 100% generalizes to all kinds of broader/shared contexts
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 03, 2019, 04:50:54 PM
Social structures are just like any other evolutionary process. Some social structures increase the probability of survival and reproduction and others don't. It shouldn't be surprising that similar social structures are seen across species, because those species that develop those social structures have survival advantages.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on April 03, 2019, 06:31:12 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/DUXe3rP.jpg)

You know, in an attempt to find images in the image thread? /passiveaggressiveness
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 03, 2019, 07:06:59 PM
More likely, "puppies are cute" was the motivator. Hunter kills Mom, takes one or pups home to the kids. Second place would be wolves scavenging and becoming accustomed to being around humans to the point when the two species were willing to be in proximity.

And always remember "a dog is a wolf with the interesting parts bred out of it."

I think there's more to it than that though. For one thing, wolves have a social structure that is much more similar to the way humans typically organize than most other animals, we both hunt and scavenge in similar ways (with a high degree of social organization and persistence hunting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting)), we're both omnivorous to some extent, and wolves are relatively intelligent. There's a lot of recognition between our species, and we occupy overlapping ecological niches, so we're either competing or we cooperate - an opportunity which not every species can recognize, but both of our species can, because we both have the social structure and observational intelligence needed to do so. And we're both opportunistic and we both bond strongly with our immediate social group. If cuteness were the only factor, I'm guessing small, timid, non-threatening social prey animals like rabbits would've been a much more likely candidate for early domestication.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 03, 2019, 07:11:21 PM
Social structures are just like any other evolutionary process.
They are and they aren't. They differ in that they're the product of brains communicating, and thus subject to memetic evolution, not just genetic evolution. That means that what is advantageous to the meme may survive at the expense of the genetic fitness of the individual.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 03, 2019, 07:21:57 PM
Social structures are just like any other evolutionary process.
They are and they aren't. They differ in that they're the product of brains communicating, and thus subject to memetic evolution, not just genetic evolution. That means that what is advantageous to the meme may survive at the expense of the genetic fitness of the individual.

Genetics, in this case, can be indirectly involved. Genetics may provide the underlying tendency for social interaction, but does not dictate the how that will occur.

Animal groups that adopt the advantageous methods of social interaction gain a survival advantage over groups of other animals (perhaps of the same species and genetic makeup) that, for whatever reason, don't adopt the advantageous methods, or less advantageous methods.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 03, 2019, 07:44:59 PM
Social structures are just like any other evolutionary process.
They are and they aren't. They differ in that they're the product of brains communicating, and thus subject to memetic evolution, not just genetic evolution. That means that what is advantageous to the meme may survive at the expense of the genetic fitness of the individual.

Genetics, in this case, can be indirectly involved. Genetics may provide the underlying tendency for social interaction, but does not dictate the how that will occur.

It can but it doesn't have to. For example, becoming celibate reduces your fitness to zero, and I've yet to hear of any genetic basis for that choice. Yet some people choose that lifestyle because of their social organization. And as long as there are any viable hosts, these ideas can "survive and procreate" at the expense of the genetic fitness of the individual.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 03, 2019, 07:45:46 PM
Humans did, I think, breed for puppies that were plyable.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 03, 2019, 07:55:45 PM
Yeah, but I'm guessing the two species approached each other gradually at first, and the breeding probably came later.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 03, 2019, 07:57:02 PM
Humans did, I think, breed for puppies that were plyable.

Maybe unintentionally. Any dog (wolf) thought to be dangerous or not cute would have been killed or driven off, the ones the kids like would have been spared.
Title: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 03, 2019, 08:11:09 PM
For example, becoming celibate reduces your fitness to zero, and I've yet to hear of any genetic basis for that choice. 


Evolution is not all about genetics and it's not all about every individual passing their genes to the very next generation.

Let's imagine you're a cave person. You're in a thriving cave village with a hundred families more or less.  Your community is so successful that each couple raises an average of four children to child bearing age in your village.

Now, you have males in competition for females and females in competition for males.

Sometimes the competition becomes violent or counter productive in other ways. Also, when all the females are having babies at once, that's removing a number of economic contributors to the village's economics temporarily (and, sadly, sometimes permanently).

But, suppose that 1 of 10 offspring in the village is gay, or lesbian or celibate. Not trying to father children; not getting pregnant. Rather than 10 males competing for the females, there's only 9. Rather than 10 females having babies at once, there's only 9 and the tenth is available to help the others or hunt and gather or otherwise contribute, without causing the conflict that another male would.

It's true that one out of ten won't pass their own genes on, but, having that 10% not in competition with the others, and not giving birth, can make the prospects for the entire village surviving better.

If you have two kids and one is celibate or gay that may increase your chances of passing your genes on to later generations (grandchildren) than if they're both active breeders in competition with each other or having babies at the same time.  So, it would be in your genes to pass on a 10% chance of your offspring being gay or celibate.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 03, 2019, 08:31:56 PM
You're talking about kin selection, which is about individual genes being passed on to the next generation. It's not a counterexample to evolution being "all about genetics".

EDIT: Also this (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16010468), fwiw, but I'm not sure we can really extrapolate current day data to pre-modern societies. And also, 60 people.

EDIT 2: Full article (https://sci-hub.tw/10.1007/s10508-005-4345-6).
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 03, 2019, 08:46:54 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/LtqFWCpl.jpg)

How do we not have a skeptical eyebrow raise smiley on this site?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 03, 2019, 08:54:49 PM
Yeah, but I'm guessing the two species approached each other gradually at first, and the breeding probably came later.
Why? The humans would have taken puppies after killing the adults. The neo-dogs would have been weeded, the ones that didn't see humans as their alpha would have been killed. Wolves don't need humans.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 03, 2019, 09:00:13 PM
Yeah, but I'm guessing the two species approached each other gradually at first, and the breeding probably came later.
Why? The humans would have taken puppies after killing the adults. The neo-dogs would have been weeded, the ones that didn't see humans as their alpha would have been killed. Wolves don't need humans.

Why not just eat the puppies like they would rabbits and other cute critters? People eat dogs today, so they probably did back then. But wolves get big and dangerous, and they would not be the easiest animals to keep, so why were they the first to be fully domesticated? I think people probably lived in some degree of symbiosis with and recognized the usefulness of wolves to some extent before they started breeding them.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 04, 2019, 06:27:04 AM
Nothing to say they wouldn't have eaten the pups if they were hungry. But wolves were introduced to human society, so some of them survived, probably in the pack of a human. Dads still have a soft spot for their kids and like to bring them treats.

When I was in docent training they told us that dogs can be socialized easily during the first two months of life. For wolves the socialization had to happen before they even opened their eyes. (Socializing as in getting used to having humans in their "pack".) A lot of pups would have died before they got the nurturing requirement down, I think.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Billzbub on April 04, 2019, 11:30:56 AM
Yeah, but I'm guessing the two species approached each other gradually at first, and the breeding probably came later.
Why? The humans would have taken puppies after killing the adults. The neo-dogs would have been weeded, the ones that didn't see humans as their alpha would have been killed. Wolves don't need humans.

Why not just eat the puppies like they would rabbits and other cute critters? People eat dogs today, so they probably did back then. But wolves get big and dangerous, and they would not be the easiest animals to keep, so why were they the first to be fully domesticated? I think people probably lived in some degree of symbiosis with and recognized the usefulness of wolves to some extent before they started breeding them.

I imagine a scenario where someone got themselves a wolf puppy and raised it to adulthood.  Everyone in the village thought the person was crazy, but then someone wanted to fight the person with the wolf and the wolf tore out their throat, they realized that it ain't so bad to have your very own wolf.  Sure, having a pet wolf is dangerous as hell, but back then it could have been less dangerous to the wolf owner than not having one.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 04, 2019, 11:50:37 AM
That kind of wolf would have Darwin'd out. Danger to the community, etc.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 04, 2019, 04:35:08 PM
Obviously it's all speculation, and clearly people started raising wolves as part of the family at some point. I just think it's more likely that the initial approach between our species was probably much more gradual. Maybe we scavenged off each other's kills, and that had us follow each other around, which in turn would have lead to more interaction and with that probably improved mutual communication and understanding. And then maybe we started making more use of each other. For example, maybe we learned to recognize each other's warning calls, and perhaps even started cooperating (http://www.sekj.org/PDF/anz41-free/anz41-545.pdf) during the hunt (as some intelligent animals apparently including wolves (https://www.zmescience.com/science/biology/hyena-wolves-hunting-20032016/) and coyotes (https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/blogs/coyote-and-badger-hunt-together) do today), as we have largely complementary hunting skills but similar prey. And then over time we would have become more accustomed to and perhaps dependent on one another, to the point where we'd start helping each other out every once in a while. Maybe some lone wolves would stick close to a camp and beg for a scraps every once in a while, and the people tolerated it because they recognized that wolves can often sense other animals better and earlier than humans can, and that might lead them to opportunity or prevent a disaster.

Anyway, I guess it's not totally impossible given that animals sometimes adopt young from other animals, but I just don't think we were totally separate communities and bitter rivals, and then one day out of the blue someone decided to welcome a dangerous predator into their hut, where their kids are living.

EDIT: The actual fuck happened there? Fixed.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 04, 2019, 05:41:02 PM
Yeah every proposed explanation I've seen for how we started living together has been gradual.

Sure, wolves don't need humans (and humans don't need wolves), but so what? Lots of beneficial things are unnecessary and facultative symbiosis is already a thing in nature.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 04, 2019, 06:20:48 PM
Yeah every proposed explanation I've seen for how we started living together has been gradual.

Sure, wolves don't need humans (and humans don't need wolves), but so what? Lots of beneficial things are unnecessary and facultative symbiosis is already a thing in nature.

Need is not the best word.

Some wolves gained an advantage by following humans around and some humans gained an advantage by tolerating wolves following them around.

Gradually you end up with a french poodle wearing a pink sweater and having her claws painted.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 04, 2019, 07:14:26 PM
Yeah every proposed explanation I've seen for how we started living together has been gradual.

Sure, wolves don't need humans (and humans don't need wolves), but so what? Lots of beneficial things are unnecessary and facultative symbiosis is already a thing in nature.
That's why I've been stressing puppies. Babies and puppies are a match made in Darwinism.  ;D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 04, 2019, 09:05:53 PM
Yeah every proposed explanation I've seen for how we started living together has been gradual.

Sure, wolves don't need humans (and humans don't need wolves), but so what? Lots of beneficial things are unnecessary and facultative symbiosis is already a thing in nature.
That's why I've been stressing puppies. Babies and puppies are a match made in Darwinism.  ;D

There's an evolutionary advantage to young mammals having big eyes. And it's not just due to interaction with humans.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 04, 2019, 09:24:29 PM
Yeah every proposed explanation I've seen for how we started living together has been gradual.

Sure, wolves don't need humans (and humans don't need wolves), but so what? Lots of beneficial things are unnecessary and facultative symbiosis is already a thing in nature.
That's why I've been stressing puppies. Babies and puppies are a match made in Darwinism.  ;D
I mean, sure, maybe we took in wolf puppies, but there's no need to posit something so frankly bizarre as a common occurrence when a gradual development of facultative symbiosis already explains what it needs to.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 06, 2019, 09:22:20 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/yOYfGiC.jpg)

EDIT: Also:

(https://i.imgur.com/I0AgpgK.jpg)

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 06, 2019, 10:46:01 AM
Yeah every proposed explanation I've seen for how we started living together has been gradual.

Sure, wolves don't need humans (and humans don't need wolves), but so what? Lots of beneficial things are unnecessary and facultative symbiosis is already a thing in nature.
That's why I've been stressing puppies. Babies and puppies are a match made in Darwinism.  ;D
I mean, sure, maybe we took in wolf puppies, but there's no need to posit something so frankly bizarre as a common occurrence when a gradual development of facultative symbiosis already explains what it needs to.
Ah, you prefer your bizarre theory over your characterization of my theory as bizarre. Got it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 06, 2019, 09:49:30 PM
The difference is that my "bizzare" "theory" (which isn't a theory at all so much as a defense of the suggestion that it was a gradual process) is actually what I've seen suggested by all the (admittedly not extensive) research I can remember reading about it.

Does your "we took home the puppies of wolves we killed" theory have similar support, or is it just your hunch?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 07, 2019, 06:22:54 AM
The difference is that my "bizzare" "theory" (which isn't a theory at all so much as a defense of the suggestion that it was a gradual process) is actually what I've seen suggested by all the (admittedly not extensive) research I can remember reading about it.

Does your "we took home the puppies of wolves we killed" theory have similar support, or is it just your hunch?
Your vague memories are "similar support"? LOL
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Gigabyte on April 07, 2019, 09:49:05 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/DUXe3rP.jpg)

You know, in an attempt to find images in the image thread? /passiveaggressiveness
  I see wat u did

(https://i.imgflip.com/1c69c2.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 07, 2019, 11:51:25 AM
The difference is that my "bizzare" "theory" (which isn't a theory at all so much as a defense of the suggestion that it was a gradual process) is actually what I've seen suggested by all the (admittedly not extensive) research I can remember reading about it.

Does your "we took home the puppies of wolves we killed" theory have similar support, or is it just your hunch?
Your vague memories are "similar support"? LOL
So you've got nothing. Gotcha.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 07, 2019, 12:53:36 PM
The difference is that my "bizzare" "theory" (which isn't a theory at all so much as a defense of the suggestion that it was a gradual process) is actually what I've seen suggested by all the (admittedly not extensive) research I can remember reading about it.

Does your "we took home the puppies of wolves we killed" theory have similar support, or is it just your hunch?
Your vague memories are "similar support"? LOL
So you've got nothing. Gotcha.
Nope, the guy who runs the African painted dog sanctuary in Tanzania told us that puppies are routinely adopted by natives. No reason this didn't happen ~40,000 years ago. And you have...
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on April 07, 2019, 03:32:06 PM
Social structures are just like any other evolutionary process.
They are and they aren't. They differ in that they're the product of brains communicating, and thus subject to memetic evolution, not just genetic evolution. That means that what is advantageous to the meme may survive at the expense of the genetic fitness of the individual.

But nothing in genetic evolution prevents genes from surviving at the expense of the the "fitness of the individual." Indeed, it is my understanding that some genes are highly conserved despite being detrimental to fitness as long as they do not impose an actual impediment to reproduction. In that way they are very much like memes: memes and genes both survive by being the strongest genes and memes, not because they make the strongest individuals.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 07, 2019, 05:31:53 PM
Nope, the guy who runs the African painted dog sanctuary in Tanzania told us that puppies are routinely adopted by natives. No reason this didn't happen ~40,000 years ago. And you have...
So fully modern humans (who are no doubt well aware of the existence of domestic dogs) will sometimes adopt the puppies of a smaller wild canid species. That doesn't mean the adoption of gray wolf pups frequently enough to affect the evolution of subpopulations of wolves.

(As I understood it, your claim was not simply that ancient humans sometimes adopted wolves, but that this happened enough, with completely wild wolves, to start the genetic changes leading to modern dogs. Your hypothesis contrasted with "the initial approach between our species was probably much more gradual. Maybe we scavenged off each other's kills, and that had us follow each other around")

As for what I have, I'd say all the research and researchers that support the commensal pathway (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_domestic_dog#Commensal_pathway) to domestication.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 07, 2019, 05:44:27 PM
But nothing in genetic evolution prevents genes from surviving at the expense of the the "fitness of the individual." Indeed, it is my understanding that some genes are highly conserved despite being detrimental to fitness as long as they do not impose an actual impediment to reproduction.

Before we go into that: I think that hints at a misunderstanding of fitness: evolutionary fitness is determined exclusively by your ability to reproduce. Everything else is secondary. It has nothing directly to do with being the strongest in a physical strength or health sense, it has to do with how many copies of yourself (or more specifically, your genes) you can leave behind. Everything else is just what follows from that. So by definition you can't have genes that are detrimental to fitness but not detrimental to your ability to reproduce.

EDIT: To clarify: there's ways to quibble about the exact definition; for example, do you measure fitness as change in gene frequency over one generation, two, or many? But it's always about reproduction. If you can't or haven't and won't reproduce and you are not 100% immortal, your fitness is zero.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 07, 2019, 07:03:38 PM
But nothing in genetic evolution prevents genes from surviving at the expense of the the "fitness of the individual." Indeed, it is my understanding that some genes are highly conserved despite being detrimental to fitness as long as they do not impose an actual impediment to reproduction.

Before we go into that: I think that hints at a misunderstanding of fitness: evolutionary fitness is determined exclusively by your ability to reproduce. Everything else is secondary. It has nothing directly to do with being the strongest in a physical strength or health sense, it has to do with how many copies of yourself (or more specifically, your genes) you can leave behind. Everything else is just what follows from that. So by definition you can't have genes that are detrimental to fitness but not detrimental to your ability to reproduce.

EDIT: To clarify: there's ways to quibble about the exact definition; for example, do you measure fitness as change in gene frequency over one generation, two, or many? But it's always about reproduction. If you can't or haven't and won't reproduce and you are not 100% immortal, your fitness is zero.


I don’t think that’s what Darwin meant by fit. I think he meant fit in terms of well adapted to the environment.

And reproduction per se  is not primary. It is secondary to survival. Of course.

The point is that there are numerous examples evolutionary advantages to a species for having members that do not reproduce.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 07, 2019, 08:47:22 PM
I don’t think that’s what Darwin meant by fit. I think he meant fit in terms of well adapted to the environment.

And reproduction per se  is not primary. It is secondary to survival. Of course.

No, it actually isn't. If you can reproduce by dying, that is a viable strategy that numerous species employ. Since nothing is really immortal, reproduction is key.

Wikipedia: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitness_(biology))

Quote
Fitness (often denoted w or ω in population genetics models) is the quantitative representation of natural and sexual selection within evolutionary biology. It can be defined either with respect to a genotype or to a phenotype in a given environment. In either case, it describes individual reproductive success and is equal to the average contribution to the gene pool of the next generation that is made by individuals of the specified genotype or phenotype.

Emphasis mine.

And the blurb (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitness):
Quote
Fitness may refer to:
...
Fitness (biology), an individual's ability to propagate its genes
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 07, 2019, 10:02:18 PM
I don’t think that’s what Darwin meant by fit. I think he meant fit in terms of well adapted to the environment.

And reproduction per se  is not primary. It is secondary to survival. Of course.

No, it actually isn't. If you can reproduce by dying, that is a viable strategy that numerous species employ. Since nothing is really immortal, reproduction is key.
This is how Darwin described it:
 
Survival of the fittest - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest)
Quote
In On the Origin of Species, he introduced the phrase in the fifth edition published in 1869,[3][4] intending it to mean "better designed for an immediate, local environment".[5][6]

 
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 08, 2019, 08:32:07 AM
The first three sentences from that wikipedia page:

Quote
"Survival of the fittest" is a phrase that originated from Darwinian evolutionary theory as a way of describing the mechanism of natural selection. The biological concept of fitness is defined as reproductive success. In Darwinian terms the phrase is best understood as "Survival of the form that will leave the most copies of itself in successive generations."

And a little later:

Quote
The biological concept of fitness refers to reproductive success, as opposed to survival, and is not explicit in the specific ways in which organisms can be more "fit" (increase reproductive success) as having phenotypic characteristics that enhance survival and reproduction (which was the meaning that Spencer had in mind).[citation needed]

Critiquing the phrase

While the phrase "survival of the fittest" is often used to mean "natural selection", it is avoided by modern biologists, because the phrase can be misleading. For example, survival is only one aspect of selection, and not always the most important. Another problem is that the word "fit" is frequently confused with a state of physical fitness. In the evolutionary meaning "fitness" is the rate of reproductive output among a class of genetic variants.[13]

...

The phrase can also be interpreted to express a theory or hypothesis: that "fit" as opposed to "unfit" individuals or species, in some sense of "fit", will survive some test. Nevertheless, when extended to individuals it is a conceptual mistake, the phrase is a reference to the transgenerational survival of the heritable attributes; particular individuals are quite irrelevant. This becomes more clear when referring to Viral quasispecies, in survival of the flattest, which makes it clear to survive makes no reference to the question of even being alive itself; rather the functional capacity of proteins to carry out work.

Interpretations of the phrase as expressing a theory are in danger of being tautological, meaning roughly "those with a propensity to survive have a propensity to survive"; to have content the theory must use a concept of fitness that is independent of that of survival.[5][14]
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 08, 2019, 09:22:10 AM
People get the idea that only the "fittest" survive. Lazy thinking. The more fit you are to survive the more likely you will pass on your genes.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 08, 2019, 10:24:49 AM
The first three sentences from that wikipedia page:

Quote
"Survival of the fittest" is a phrase that originated from Darwinian evolutionary theory as a way of describing the mechanism of natural selection. The biological concept of fitness is defined as reproductive success. In Darwinian terms the phrase is best understood as "Survival of the form that will leave the most copies of itself in successive generations."

And a little later:

Quote
The biological concept of fitness refers to reproductive success, as opposed to survival, and is not explicit in the specific ways in which organisms can be more "fit" (increase reproductive success) as having phenotypic characteristics that enhance survival and reproduction (which was the meaning that Spencer had in mind).[citation needed]

Critiquing the phrase

While the phrase "survival of the fittest" is often used to mean "natural selection", it is avoided by modern biologists, because the phrase can be misleading. For example, survival is only one aspect of selection, and not always the most important. Another problem is that the word "fit" is frequently confused with a state of physical fitness. In the evolutionary meaning "fitness" is the rate of reproductive output among a class of genetic variants.[13]

...

The phrase can also be interpreted to express a theory or hypothesis: that "fit" as opposed to "unfit" individuals or species, in some sense of "fit", will survive some test. Nevertheless, when extended to individuals it is a conceptual mistake, the phrase is a reference to the transgenerational survival of the heritable attributes; particular individuals are quite irrelevant. This becomes more clear when referring to Viral quasispecies, in survival of the flattest, which makes it clear to survive makes no reference to the question of even being alive itself; rather the functional capacity of proteins to carry out work.

Interpretations of the phrase as expressing a theory are in danger of being tautological, meaning roughly "those with a propensity to survive have a propensity to survive"; to have content the theory must use a concept of fitness that is independent of that of survival.[5][14]

None of that contradicts what I said.

The tautology warned about comes from the more modern definition of fitness 

But Darwin was referring to how well a species fit their environments.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 08, 2019, 05:27:11 PM
We were discussing how we understand evolution to work today, so I'm not sure how that's relevant.

And with that in mind, to stop derailing this thread; what society thinks we do:

(https://i2.wp.com/atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/skeptic-cartoon.gif?w=300)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 08, 2019, 06:31:08 PM
We were discussing how we understand evolution to work today

Not really. We were discussing human/wolf/dog socialization. From that evolutionary issues arose but those are tangential to the issue.

Darwin’s remarks on fittest and kin selection are more relevant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 08, 2019, 06:48:59 PM
We were discussing how we understand evolution to work today

Not really. We were discussing human/wolf/dog socialization. From that evolutionary issues arose but those are tangential to the issue.

Darwin’s remarks on fittest and kin selection are more relevant.

We have 150 years of theory and empirical research since Darwin. What makes you think that we should just ignore all that here? It's a rhetorical question.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 08, 2019, 06:54:38 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/5Wx6nZP.gif)
Credit to the Mythbusters.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 08, 2019, 07:01:27 PM
We were discussing how we understand evolution to work today

Not really. We were discussing human/wolf/dog socialization. From that evolutionary issues arose but those are tangential to the issue.

Darwin’s remarks on fittest and kin selection are more relevant.

We have 150 years of theory and empirical research since Darwin. What makes you think that we should just ignore all that here? It's a rhetorical question.


Because the discussion is less about genetics and more about behavior, and when Darwin was speaking of fittest that was as much about behavior and the environment as anything else.

Again, genetics is only a part of evolution. (An important part, to be sure, but there's much more to it).
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 08, 2019, 07:20:41 PM
Not if it leads people to argue that we can have higher fitness with lower reproductive value or vice versa, because that is literally a contradiction in terms.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 08, 2019, 07:41:07 PM
Not if it leads people to argue that we can have higher fitness with lower reproductive value or vice versa, because that is literally a contradiction in terms.

No one is arguing that. 

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 08, 2019, 08:38:24 PM
Not if it leads people to argue that we can have higher fitness with lower reproductive value or vice versa, because that is literally a contradiction in terms.

No one is arguing that.

Scroll back. That's how we got here.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 08, 2019, 11:28:38 PM
Not if it leads people to argue that we can have higher fitness with lower reproductive value or vice versa, because that is literally a contradiction in terms.

No one is arguing that.

Scroll back. That's how we got here.
Quote it and we can talk. I have a feeling we’re talking past each other


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: lonely moa on April 09, 2019, 02:23:12 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/5Wx6nZP.gif)
Credit to the Mythbusters.

I made a little cannon for my physics teacher.  It fires a marble across the room.  The marble breaks the current at the "muzzle" of the cannon barrel that is driving an electromagnet that drops a tin lid which is struck by the marble just as it hits the floor.  All very cool and the kids are amazed.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 09, 2019, 06:23:59 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/5Wx6nZP.gif)
Credit to the Mythbusters.

I made a little cannon for my physics teacher.  It fires a marble across the room.  The marble breaks the current at the "muzzle" of the cannon barrel that is driving an electromagnet that drops a tin lid which is struck by the marble just as it hits the floor.  All very cool and the kids are amazed.
I used to be a volunteer at the St. Louis Science Center. We did demonstrations at local school, fairs, etc. We had a "dancing fire" segment that enthralled almost all the kids. (One ran like hell. I made a note to let the teachers know beforehand what we were going to do.)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 09, 2019, 09:07:27 AM
Not if it leads people to argue that we can have higher fitness with lower reproductive value or vice versa, because that is literally a contradiction in terms.

No one is arguing that.

Scroll back. That's how we got here.
Quote it and we can talk. I have a feeling we’re talking past each other

Here's what I was reacting to:

But nothing in genetic evolution prevents genes from surviving at the expense of the the "fitness of the individual." Indeed, it is my understanding that some genes are highly conserved despite being detrimental to fitness as long as they do not impose an actual impediment to reproduction.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 09, 2019, 12:08:11 PM
Are you talking about things like sickle cell anemia?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 09, 2019, 12:33:47 PM
Not if it leads people to argue that we can have higher fitness with lower reproductive value or vice versa, because that is literally a contradiction in terms.

No one is arguing that.

Scroll back. That's how we got here.
Quote it and we can talk. I have a feeling we’re talking past each other

Here's what I was reacting to:

But nothing in genetic evolution prevents genes from surviving at the expense of the the "fitness of the individual." Indeed, it is my understanding that some genes are highly conserved despite being detrimental to fitness as long as they do not impose an actual impediment to reproduction.

I don't think Laninist would want me to explain what he meant there. So I'll just say that's well supported by evolutionary theory.

I believe from your remarks that you're looking at evolution from an oversimplified single generational perspective.

Correct me if this is not an accurate interpretation: you're saying that the gene's that foster individual members of a species to be able to reproduce are carried forward and those that interfere with that are not.

I'm saying that's not always the case. There are numerous examples across numerous species where genes that prevent the ability of some individuals in that species to successfully reproduce are preserved, as the traits and or behaviors associated with those genes help other members of the population to survive and successfully reproduce.

Ants and bees are the most commonly understood examples.

Mammal herds, where larger numbers protect the younger members of the herds, and where a significant number of males in the herd don't pass their genes on is another.

In humans, there seems to be a gene that causes a percentage of the population to be homosexual. (I've heard numbers from 2% to 10%).  In this case, the male homosexuals are not in as much competition with other males for females, and are able to devote more of their energy to more productive, survival-related tasks. Similarly the female homosexuals are not burdened with pregnancy and child birth, and the very real risks those posed for survival, and they too are able to be more productive year round.

These are genetic traits that constrict or prevent these individuals from passing their genes on to the next generation, but they are preserved in that they improve the survival prospects of the rest of the population.

A mating couple of paleo humans would have a better chance of passing their genes on to second and third generations if x% of their first generation offspring were homosexual. Subsequent generations of would have that gene. A mating couple of paleo humans who did not have that gay gene would be at an evolutionary disadvantage.

This was mentioned earlier and you dismissed it as kin selection.

It is kin selection, but kin selection is a very broad and complex subject with different impacts across the entire spectrum of life, and acts differently in every species and many subspecies where it's found.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 09, 2019, 01:06:38 PM
These are genetic traits that constrict or prevent these individuals from passing their genes on to the next generation, but they are preserved in that they improve the survival prospects of the rest of the population.
No, they are preserved in that they improve the survival to reproduction prospects of other individuals with those same genes.

A dominant infertility gene wouldn't be preserved because individuals with it wouldn't reproduce, even if it greatly improved their survival prospects for the person with the gene *and* for everyone else in the population.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 09, 2019, 02:00:13 PM
These are genetic traits that constrict or prevent these individuals from passing their genes on to the next generation, but they are preserved in that they improve the survival prospects of the rest of the population.
No, they are preserved in that they improve the survival to reproduction prospects of other individuals with those same genes.

In some cases they are increasing the survival to reproduction of other individuals with similar genes.

But, no. It is not the case that in a population of anything more complex than bees and ants, and even then, that members of a population has the same genes. 

They often have similar genes, but not the same.  Mammals born to the same mother can have different fathers, for example.

With complex social interactions found in mammals non-breeding individuals may be contributing to the survival of competing members of their parent's species.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Billzbub on April 09, 2019, 02:47:40 PM
I made a little cannon for my physics teacher.  It fires a marble across the room.  The marble breaks the current at the "muzzle" of the cannon barrel that is driving an electromagnet that drops a tin lid which is struck by the marble just as it hits the floor.  All very cool and the kids are amazed.

That IS cool!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 09, 2019, 03:46:44 PM
I don't think Laninist would want me to explain what he meant there. So I'll just say that's well supported by evolutionary theory.

No, it isn't, unless you redefine fitness. Fitness is reproductive success.

I believe from your remarks that you're looking at evolution from an oversimplified single generational perspective.

Correct me if this is not an accurate interpretation: you're saying that the gene's that foster individual members of a species to be able to reproduce are carried forward and those that interfere with that are not.

I'm saying The Latinist was using the word "fitness" wrong, and his statement is a paradoxical one.

I'm saying that's not always the case. There are numerous examples across numerous species where genes that prevent the ability of some individuals in that species to successfully reproduce are preserved, as the traits and or behaviors associated with those genes help other members of the population to survive and successfully reproduce.

This is not an example of something that is "detrimental to fitness but without imposing an actual impediment to reproduction". It can't be, because fitness is relative reproductive success by definition, as I just showed you several times. And in this case, that's important because if you think of it as anything else, then the theory of evolution makes no mathematical sense and your predictions are going to be wildly mistaken.

EDIT: For example, if you think that fitness is more about survival than reproduction, then animals killing themselves just to get to mates make absolutely no sense. But it makes total sense if fitness is about reproductive success. And of course it happens all the time in nature.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 09, 2019, 03:48:28 PM
These are genetic traits that constrict or prevent these individuals from passing their genes on to the next generation, but they are preserved in that they improve the survival prospects of the rest of the population.
No, they are preserved in that they improve the survival to reproduction prospects of other individuals with those same genes.

In some cases they are increasing the survival to reproduction of other individuals with similar genes.

But, no. It is not the case that in a population of anything more complex than bees and ants, and even then, that members of a population has the same genes. 

They often have similar genes, but not the same.  Mammals born to the same mother can have different fathers, for example.

With complex social interactions found in mammals non-breeding individuals may be contributing to the survival of competing members of their parent's species.

Kin selection can only work if you share a certain percentage of identical genes with someone. Otherwise, it isn't kin selection. It works by increasing the chance that some of your genes make it into the next generation, by helping someone who shares a significant portion of those genes, in other words, by increasing your own fitness. Your kid shares 50% of your genes. Your brother/sister does too. And your brother's/sister's kid shares 25% of your genes. If you are unlikely to be reproductively successful and you can help your family raise 2 kids, then in terms of fitness that is statistically similar to having one of your own.

EDIT: Actually, even if you are reproducing, it can still yield a substantial fitness benefit, but there will be more of a tradeof because your own offspring offer twice the fitness boost.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on April 09, 2019, 03:55:44 PM
It sounds like you guys are slowly working toward an argument about inclusive fitness (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusive_fitness):

Quote
In evolutionary biology, inclusive fitness is one of two metrics of evolutionary success as defined by W. D. Hamilton in 1964:
  • Personal fitness is the number of offspring that an individual begets (regardless of who rescues/rears/supports them)
  • Inclusive fitness is the number of offspring equivalents that an individual rears, rescues or otherwise supports through its behaviour (regardless of who begets them)
An individual's own child, who carries one half of the individual's genes, is defined as one offspring equivalent. A sibling's child, who will carry one-quarter of the individual's genes, is 1/2 offspring equivalent. Similarly, a cousin's child, who has 1/16 of the individual's genes, is 1/8 offspring equivalent.

From the gene's point of view, evolutionary success ultimately depends on leaving behind the maximum number of copies of itself in the population. Prior to Hamilton's work, it was generally assumed that genes only achieved this through the number of viable offspring produced by the individual organism they occupied. However, this overlooked a wider consideration of a gene's success, most clearly in the case of the social insects where the vast majority of individuals do not produce offspring.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 09, 2019, 04:21:44 PM
They often have similar genes, but not the same.  Mammals born to the same mother can have different fathers, for example.
I'm talking about individual genes, or individual genetic traits, not entire genomes.

(You were apparently talking about the same thing, until just now when it became more convenient to move the goalposts.)

A particular gene that lowers the reproductive success of individuals who have it will propagate (its genetic trait will be preserved) only to the extent that it increases the reproductive success of other individuals who also have that exact same gene.

If even a single copy of a gene makes you sterile, even if it makes you live 10x longer than everyone else and even if it somehow lets you guarantee the survival and reproduction of all of your fertile siblings and nieces and nephews and their offspring and so on for twenty generations, that gene that makes you so great and powerful won't propagate because none of the people with that particular gene will ever reproduce.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on April 09, 2019, 04:30:03 PM
Mods, can the evolution discussion be moved to a new thread? I'm sure it's interesting, but it is very very very very very very far from the subject of this thread.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bimble on April 09, 2019, 04:41:18 PM
Mods, can the evolution discussion be moved to a new thread? I'm sure it's interesting, but it is very very very very very very far from the subject of this thread.

Or could we at least have some photos of the domesticated Russia foxes from the Dmitry Belyayev's fox experiment... where they've been breed for domesticity...

(https://www.nationalgeographic.com/content/dam/animals/2018/08/fox-genetics/03-fox-genetics-img_1307.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 09, 2019, 04:41:53 PM
I also want to point out another thing that snuck past me: herd behavior is something different. For that to be kin selection, the herd would have to have an incredibly high degree of genetic homogeneity. Herd behavior is a trait that is advantageous on average for those that have the trait. On the most basic level, it works by greatly reducing the chance that a predator on the hunt will single you out among all the animals in the herd. And of course depending on the behavior it may provide additional protection. So yeah, maybe some gene will lead an adult wildebeest to attack a lion to defend a calf and get itself killed, but those same genes gave it a fighting chance in the first place. The genes raise the individual's chance at a high reproductive success statistically, but chance plays a large role in evolution, and the actual chance event that gets the individual wildebeest killed is obviously not encoded in the genes. In other words, the (statistically anomalous) deleterious behavior is a byproduct of behavior that is highly advantageous, and we shouldn't be hyper-adaptationist and expect it to have some sort of evolutionary advantage in itself. Anyway, the point is: If that specific deleterious behavior was all that was coded for by those specific genes (and the genes weren't somehow piggybacking, like being physically close to other, highly conserved genes), they wouldn't propagate for very long, because they would lower the average fitness of the individuals that carried them, and thus there would be negative selection pressure.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 09, 2019, 05:22:42 PM
They often have similar genes, but not the same.  Mammals born to the same mother can have different fathers, for example.
I'm talking about individual genes, or individual genetic traits, not entire genomes.

(You were apparently talking about the same thing, until just now when it became more convenient to move the goalposts.)

Wait, what? I didn't move the goal posts.  You seem to be ignoring the key point I have been making from the start.

Let me try again. A mating couple (lets say humans) reproduces, and their genes are passed on to the next generation. But if none of the members of that generation fail to reproduce, then that couple's line ends there. 

If x% of that couple's offspring do not engage in mating, but instead devote all that energy to hunting, gathering, protecting, nurturing, etc., and zero percent of the females die during childbirth, that enhances the opportunity for the rest of that couple's offspring to survive and reproduce.

The genetic material of the offspring who did not survive is irrelevant. But the genetic makeup of the mating pair, including the x% gay or otherwise not interested in reproduction, will also pass on to the next generation. 


Quote
A particular gene that lowers the reproductive success of individuals who have it will propagate (its genetic trait will be preserved) only to the extent that it increases the reproductive success of other individuals who also have that exact same gene.

No. That is a one-dimensional (or single generation) way of looking at it.  The genes of the parents of reproducing and non-reproducing offspring will be carried through to the next generation by the offspring that reproduce.

That "x% of offspring are sterile" gene will be preserved.


Quote
If even a single copy of a gene makes you sterile, even if it makes you live 10x longer than everyone else and even if it somehow lets you guarantee the survival and reproduction of all of your fertile siblings and nieces and nephews and their offspring and so on for twenty generations, that gene that makes you so great and powerful won't propagate because none of the people with that particular gene will ever reproduce.

Again, single generation, on dimensional approach.

If there is a single gene that makes a small percentage of a mating pair's offspring sterile, but for the reasons I've outlined several times now, that enhances the survival of the rest of the offspring, the genes the make that small percentage sterile will be preserved.

Mods, can the evolution discussion be moved to a new thread? I'm sure it's interesting, but it is very very very very very very far from the subject of this thread.

That would be fine with me, I'll go wherever the discussion goes.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 09, 2019, 05:31:16 PM
I also want to point out another thing that snuck past me: herd behavior is something different. For that to be kin selection, the herd would have to have an incredibly high degree of genetic homogeneity. Herd behavior is a trait that is advantageous on average for those that have the trait. On the most basic level, it works by greatly reducing the chance that a predator on the hunt will single you out among all the animals in the herd.

No.  Predators prey on the weakest individuals. That's basically the very young, the very old, the sick, the injured and the stupid (or unlucky).

A large herd protects the weaker members by sheer numbers. They will trample predators or work together using horns. Zebras use their stripes to confuse the predators.

The larger the herd, the better protection (generally). But too many aggressive males competing for the females can disrupt herds and cause them to split and become weaker. But if x% of the males are not aggressively competing for mates, then the herd can grow a bit larger and provide better protection for the newborns.

And, if that happens that x% of offspring that are not reproducing gene will be preserved.

And it seems you're looking at both kin selection and herd behavior backwards.

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on April 09, 2019, 10:05:41 PM
(https://i.redd.it/j52kb71aacr21.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 09, 2019, 11:08:40 PM
Quote
If even a single copy of a gene makes you sterile, even if it makes you live 10x longer than everyone else and even if it somehow lets you guarantee the survival and reproduction of all of your fertile siblings and nieces and nephews and their offspring and so on for twenty generations, that gene that makes you so great and powerful won't propagate because none of the people with that particular gene will ever reproduce.

Again, single generation, on dimensional approach.

If there is a single gene that makes a small percentage of a mating pair's offspring sterile, but for the reasons I've outlined several times now, that enhances the survival of the rest of the offspring, the genes the make that small percentage sterile will be preserved.
The fact that you apparently think this contradicts what I said suggests you're kinda shit at reading.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 10, 2019, 07:04:27 AM
(https://i.redd.it/j52kb71aacr21.jpg)
Shared that with one of my moronic cousins.

"You can seem the Mid-Ocean Ridge quite nicely."

"Yeah, and the Bermuda Triangle too!"
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on April 10, 2019, 08:33:33 AM
But nothing in genetic evolution prevents genes from surviving at the expense of the the "fitness of the individual." Indeed, it is my understanding that some genes are highly conserved despite being detrimental to fitness as long as they do not impose an actual impediment to reproduction.

Before we go into that: I think that hints at a misunderstanding of fitness: evolutionary fitness is determined exclusively by your ability to reproduce. Everything else is secondary. It has nothing directly to do with being the strongest in a physical strength or health sense, it has to do with how many copies of yourself (or more specifically, your genes) you can leave behind. Everything else is just what follows from that. So by definition you can't have genes that are detrimental to fitness but not detrimental to your ability to reproduce.

EDIT: To clarify: there's ways to quibble about the exact definition; for example, do you measure fitness as change in gene frequency over one generation, two, or many? But it's always about reproduction. If you can't or haven't and won't reproduce and you are not 100% immortal, your fitness is zero.

But that's exactly the point: if you are defining it in terms of the chances of reproduction of an individual (as you did in the post I was responding to), a gene may in fact decrease those chances and yet be highly conserved if that gene increases the likelihood of itself being passed on.
Title: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 10, 2019, 10:36:30 AM
Quote
If even a single copy of a gene makes you sterile, even if it makes you live 10x longer than everyone else and even if it somehow lets you guarantee the survival and reproduction of all of your fertile siblings and nieces and nephews and their offspring and so on for twenty generations, that gene that makes you so great and powerful won't propagate because none of the people with that particular gene will ever reproduce.

Again, single generation, on dimensional approach.

If there is a single gene that makes a small percentage of a mating pair's offspring sterile, but for the reasons I've outlined several times now, that enhances the survival of the rest of the offspring, the genes the make that small percentage sterile will be preserved.
The fact that you apparently think this contradicts what I said suggests you're kinda shit at reading.


So you agree that it is correct.

You just disagree that in your posts you said the exact opposite.

Keep your insults to yourself. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 10, 2019, 10:40:33 AM
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/F8C9/production/_106398636_mediaitem106398635.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on April 10, 2019, 12:50:59 PM
(https://jovemnerd.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/olho-de-sauron-buraco-negro-760x428.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 10, 2019, 12:52:21 PM
Stealin' that.  ;)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 10, 2019, 01:07:56 PM
Quote
If even a single copy of a gene makes you sterile, even if it makes you live 10x longer than everyone else and even if it somehow lets you guarantee the survival and reproduction of all of your fertile siblings and nieces and nephews and their offspring and so on for twenty generations, that gene that makes you so great and powerful won't propagate because none of the people with that particular gene will ever reproduce.

Again, single generation, on dimensional approach.

If there is a single gene that makes a small percentage of a mating pair's offspring sterile, but for the reasons I've outlined several times now, that enhances the survival of the rest of the offspring, the genes the make that small percentage sterile will be preserved.
The fact that you apparently think this contradicts what I said suggests you're kinda shit at reading.


So you agree that it is correct.

You just disagree that in your posts you said the exact opposite.
Yes, I disagree with your belief that my posts said something they didn't say.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 10, 2019, 03:25:17 PM
No.  Predators prey on the weakest individuals. That's basically the very young, the very old, the sick, the injured and the stupid (or unlucky).

A large herd protects the weaker members by sheer numbers. They will trample predators or work together using horns. Zebras use their stripes to confuse the predators.

The larger the herd, the better protection (generally).

There's all sorts of secondary reasons why gathering in large groups is advantageous, but the most basic is the numbers game I described. And herd behavior is not necessarily charitable behavior at all. The individual animals in a herd don't band together for the good of the group; they all try to reduce the danger to themselves and maybe their offspring. One of the ways they do this is by pushing in (https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/10.1162/ARTL_a_00206) towards the center (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lambs-on-the-lam-selfish-herd/) of the herd. The herding behavior follows from simple rules like that. Note that pushing yourself to the center of a crowd requires strength and stamina, and the weak are often straggling behind anyway, so they are if anything less protected than the stronger members. This of course is another selection mechanism, but it is not as altruistic as you're describing it. A herd basically works by putting other edibles in the path of predators before they can get to you (and yes, it helps if those edibles are big and strong and have a chance of hurting the predator, but it isn't necessary; think of swarming behavior in mosquitos or a school of guppies).

But too many aggressive males competing for the females can disrupt herds and cause them to split and become weaker.

I suppose that's possible for certain species.

But if x% of the males are not aggressively competing for mates, then the herd can grow a bit larger and provide better protection for the newborns.

And, if that happens that x% of offspring that are not reproducing gene will be preserved.

I can't follow your math or your phrasing very well here. If x% of males do not compete for mates, that does not mean that offspring are x% more likely to survive and reproduce, or that x% of the non-reproducing males' genes then somehow end up in the next generation's gene pool via unrelated offspring that don't share most of their genes. For this kind of argument to work, the genes in question have to be shared. If not, they will be selected against and they will eventually go extinct.

And it seems you're looking at both kin selection and herd behavior backwards.

I'm pretty sure I'm not.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on April 10, 2019, 03:42:57 PM
Katie Bauman posing with 5 petabytes of data necessary to image a black hole
(https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aVYVL0M_700bwp.webp)

5,000,000,000,000 kilobytes processed to create a 16 kilobytes picture!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 10, 2019, 03:43:29 PM
But nothing in genetic evolution prevents genes from surviving at the expense of the the "fitness of the individual." Indeed, it is my understanding that some genes are highly conserved despite being detrimental to fitness as long as they do not impose an actual impediment to reproduction.

Before we go into that: I think that hints at a misunderstanding of fitness: evolutionary fitness is determined exclusively by your ability to reproduce. Everything else is secondary. It has nothing directly to do with being the strongest in a physical strength or health sense, it has to do with how many copies of yourself (or more specifically, your genes) you can leave behind. Everything else is just what follows from that. So by definition you can't have genes that are detrimental to fitness but not detrimental to your ability to reproduce.

EDIT: To clarify: there's ways to quibble about the exact definition; for example, do you measure fitness as change in gene frequency over one generation, two, or many? But it's always about reproduction. If you can't or haven't and won't reproduce and you are not 100% immortal, your fitness is zero.

But that's exactly the point: if you are defining it in terms of the chances of reproduction of an individual (as you did in the post I was responding to), a gene may in fact decrease those chances and yet be highly conserved if that gene increases the likelihood of itself being passed on.

I think I see what you're saying now, but the wording was a bit confusing. If the genes (statistically) raise the inclusive fitness of an individual, then yes, they can be conserved even if they reduce individual fitness to 0, or even selected for, provided the benefit to inclusive fitness is enough to overcome the negative selection pressure.

And like I said before, there are some situations in which mildly deleterious genes are more highly conserved than you would expect; for instance if they are physically close to another, highly conserved gene, or if they can be carried as recessive genes or silent mutations in a significant portion of the population (which is proportional to the strength of the negative selection pressure, iirc scratch that, I'm fuzzy on the details).

And of course, genes can have many effects (pleiotropy), rather than just one, so it may yield a statistical benefit overall while still having disastrous side effects in some relatively rare situations.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Billzbub on April 10, 2019, 03:53:52 PM
Katie Bauman posing with 5 petabytes of data necessary to image a black hole
5,000,000,000,000 kilobytes processed to create a 16 kilobytes picture!

Awesome!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 10, 2019, 04:57:19 PM
Katie Bauman posing with 5 petabytes of data necessary to image a black hole
(https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aVYVL0M_700bwp.webp)

5,000,000,000,000 kilobytes processed to create a 16 kilobytes picture!
Is the raw data available for download?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 10, 2019, 05:43:46 PM
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/F8C9/production/_106398636_mediaitem106398635.jpg)

Meh, not that impressive. Probably cause the photo was taken from too far away. It probably looks pretty cool up close.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 10, 2019, 05:45:17 PM
(https://arstechnica.com/civis/download/file.php?id=43933)

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 10, 2019, 06:31:10 PM
That raises a lot of questions about what male genitals are for, if thousands of generations of reproduction don't count as successes...
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 10, 2019, 06:33:31 PM
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/F8C9/production/_106398636_mediaitem106398635.jpg)

Meh, not that impressive. Probably cause the photo was taken from too far away. It probably looks pretty cool up close.
You'd have a looooong time to enjoy the view.  ;)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 10, 2019, 06:46:37 PM
That raises a lot of questions about what male genitals are for, if thousands of generations of reproduction don't count as successes...

I guess we came full circle with the genetics discussion.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 10, 2019, 06:53:42 PM
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/F8C9/production/_106398636_mediaitem106398635.jpg)

Meh, not that impressive. Probably cause the photo was taken from too far away. It probably looks pretty cool up close.

I mean, it's only the first direct image of a the event horizon of a black hole ever and the first ever direct visual confirmation that black holes actually exist. This is resolving a relatively small structure (smaller than the orbit of Pluto) in another galaxy 55 million light years away. It's amazing we can discern any structure at all.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on April 10, 2019, 07:07:12 PM
I know, that was a joke. It's not a good idea to get a close up of a black hole.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 10, 2019, 07:33:17 PM
I know, that was a joke. It's not a good idea to get a close up of a black hole.

Oh yeah, sorry, I needed to change the filter on my sarcasm meter. Carry on.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 10, 2019, 10:15:58 PM
(smaller than the orbit of Pluto)
Not quite
(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/m87_black_hole_size_comparison.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 10, 2019, 10:46:45 PM
Ah, interesting, I guess the article I read had it wrong.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: DamoET on April 11, 2019, 03:47:23 AM
Ah, interesting, I guess the article I read had it wrong.

Not if this is correct.
https://www.eso.org/public/images/eso1907a/ (https://www.eso.org/public/images/eso1907a/)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on April 11, 2019, 08:29:59 AM
Ah, interesting, I guess the article I read had it wrong.

Not if this is correct.
https://www.eso.org/public/images/eso1907a/ (https://www.eso.org/public/images/eso1907a/)
That article says 40 billion km across. The orbit of Pluto is about 15 billion km across.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on April 11, 2019, 10:21:31 AM
(smaller than the orbit of Pluto)

We must keep in mind that the shadow that we see in the picture, does NOT correspond to the size of the black hole. The radius of the shadow is 2.6 times bigger than the black hole itself... so yes, it could be "just" the size of the orbit of Pluto.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on April 11, 2019, 11:03:08 AM
(smaller than the orbit of Pluto)

We must keep in mind that the shadow that we see in the picture, does NOT correspond to the size of the black hole. The radius of the shadow is 2.6 times bigger than the black hole itself... so yes, it could be "just" the size of the orbit of Pluto.

That was my initial reaction to the discussion, and it wasn't clear from the articles I read whether 40 billion kilometers was the diameter of the event horizon or of the shadow.  But since the mass of the black hole is given as 6.5 billion solar masses, the Schwarzschild radius can be calculated at ~19 billion kilometers.  The diameter of the black hole is then 38 billion kilometers, and the diameter of its shadow 100 billion km.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 11, 2019, 11:07:32 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/vvojnjuzrkr21.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=63b9e48f3dbf493b2220c977ce8283f140a80971)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on April 11, 2019, 11:33:20 AM
https://youtu.be/DG2esWiRe0s

At time of posting the video was not available on YouTube proper, but the embedded version played fine.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 12, 2019, 09:51:07 PM
(https://image.ibb.co/eTxWRd/uranus.jpg)

Still 5 years old.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 19, 2019, 07:26:53 PM
(https://arstechnica.com/civis/download/file.php?id=44393)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on April 19, 2019, 08:47:55 PM
Wow.  That’s kind of amazing.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on April 20, 2019, 07:25:10 PM
APOD: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Launch, a bit closer than I like.

(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1904/SpaceXFalconHeavy11Apr.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 20, 2019, 07:31:41 PM
I feel this is somehow relevant to this thread:

(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/bad_opinions.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 21, 2019, 06:03:53 PM
And on that note:

(https://66.media.tumblr.com/96f3fa6ac91e7be3d3e1c1a825b9abf7/tumblr_peykxyqs5H1vaqoiqo1_400.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 21, 2019, 09:14:18 PM
(https://pics.me.me/6-022-x-1023-6-022-x-1023-6-022-x-1023-6-022-18094543.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 22, 2019, 07:21:54 PM
(https://i.redd.it/bxpqqa6rkcv11.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/ugvrLXcl.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: lonely moa on April 23, 2019, 04:34:48 AM
oops
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on April 23, 2019, 12:42:14 PM
(https://i.chzbgr.com/full/5977201664/h27EBAB02/)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on April 23, 2019, 08:24:23 PM
The feet seem like the smallest part.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on April 26, 2019, 01:20:26 AM
https://twitter.com/_DanielSinclair/status/1121252893586276352
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on April 29, 2019, 05:00:51 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWPFmdAWRZ0

Still among the best stuff ever.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on May 03, 2019, 08:33:05 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/UBSHYfQ.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on May 04, 2019, 07:24:52 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/eM9GQIfl.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 04, 2019, 07:44:51 AM
"Yeah, but..."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on May 04, 2019, 05:45:37 PM
Our home Laniakea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laniakea_Supercluster):
(https://26d3ia2o0l581y7l752i7a5k-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Laniakea.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 04, 2019, 06:40:40 PM
Portuguese man-o-space?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on May 06, 2019, 12:39:50 AM
More like one of those optical-fibre lamps that were popular in the 80s.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 06, 2019, 05:53:50 PM
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1118438671538118656
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 06, 2019, 07:38:35 PM
Virtual flyby of the Whirlpool Galaxy. From APOD. https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap190506.html
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on May 08, 2019, 02:57:23 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScrm9XeI3o&list=PLz-FsX8E3MzKvmk1fBt1MUa24vf6SFilO&index=5
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 08, 2019, 03:50:32 PM
Little ole EF-1. Ain't no big deal.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on May 13, 2019, 02:27:57 AM
Correlation ≠ Causation

(https://i.imgur.com/Efi8Y7u.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 13, 2019, 06:09:33 AM
I think you missed something. There are NO MARTIANS ALIVE TODAY! Ponder that.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on May 13, 2019, 07:13:03 AM
Correlation ≠ Causation

...but it's suggestive.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on May 13, 2019, 09:22:22 AM
Correlation ≠ Causation

...but it's suggestive.

That's the problem!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on May 16, 2019, 08:48:01 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/bGpN2pv.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 16, 2019, 08:51:19 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/bGpN2pv.jpg)
Um, no, that kid had your genes too.  ::)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on May 18, 2019, 07:04:53 PM
It's a somewhat flawed argument, but it made me laugh anyway.

(https://i.imgur.com/MAvIM8N.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on May 18, 2019, 07:40:29 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/Iy6ABbQ.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/dNelTSd.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on May 19, 2019, 10:35:28 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/wyMWGsll.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on May 21, 2019, 07:24:31 PM
It's a somewhat flawed argument, but it made me laugh anyway.

Not only is he a libertarian, he's a full-on Ayn Rand Objectivist. Or at least he used to be before he got skinny. I don't know if he still is.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Nacreous on May 22, 2019, 11:36:30 AM
It's a somewhat flawed argument, but it made me laugh anyway.

Not only is he a libertarian, he's a full-on Ayn Rand Objectivist...
...and an eager swallower of Cato bullshit on climate change.   He is an object lesson for all skeptics lest they get too smug about how woo-woo proof they are.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on May 22, 2019, 09:27:24 PM
It's a somewhat flawed argument, but it made me laugh anyway.

Not only is he a libertarian, he's a full-on Ayn Rand Objectivist...
...and an eager swallower of Cato bullshit on climate change.   He is an object lesson for all skeptics lest they get too smug about how woo-woo proof they are.

He made some fairly ignorant comments at TAM6, which people called him out on, so he made some further statements at TAM7 (I was there) which pretty much retracted all of them. I'd be pretty surprise if he still believed that climate change isn't real.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on May 22, 2019, 11:12:44 PM
It's a somewhat flawed argument, but it made me laugh anyway.

Not only is he a libertarian, he's a full-on Ayn Rand Objectivist...
...and an eager swallower of Cato bullshit on climate change.   He is an object lesson for all skeptics lest they get too smug about how woo-woo proof they are.

Yeah... If I'm not mistaken, he is or was actually a fellow at Cato. My info there might be a little out of date as I kind of gave up on that duo after reading about that while I was delving into climate science. Sacred cows, I guess.

Somehow it's never the werecows, though. }|:ó(
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on May 23, 2019, 12:11:06 AM
Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn_Jillette) does say that he is still a fellow at the Cato Institute.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on May 23, 2019, 04:11:35 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/VVulJqY.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on May 23, 2019, 04:22:52 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qg-1_CEwP_I

(Note, it is about the entire species and planet.)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 24, 2019, 07:31:29 PM
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap190524.html

Quote
Boulders on Bennu
Image Credit: NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, University of Arizona
Explanation: An abundance of boulders litters the surface asteroid 101955 Bennu in this dramatic close-up from the OSIRIS-REx spacecraft. Taken on March 28 from a distance of just 3.4 kilometers (2.1 miles) the field of view is about 50 meters across while the light colored boulder at top right is 4.8 meters tall. Likely a loose conglomerate rubble pile asteroid, Bennu itself spans less than 500 meters. That's about the height of the Empire State Building. Mapping the near Earth asteroid since the spacecraft's arrival in December of 2018, the OSIRIS-REx mission plans a TAG (Touch-and-Go) maneuver for July 2020 to sample Bennu's rugged surface, returning the sample to planet Earth in September 2023. Citizen scientists have been invited to help choose the sample collection site.

(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1905/pdco-20190328-up-slope-to-limb.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on May 24, 2019, 07:42:13 PM
I've been wondering is that loose rocks and boulders on the surface, or is it loose rocks and boulders all the way down?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on May 24, 2019, 08:24:36 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/nECnCXD.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 24, 2019, 09:00:35 PM
I've been wondering is that loose rocks and boulders on the surface, or is it loose rocks and boulders all the way down?
Either way or something in-between.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 25, 2019, 09:46:34 AM
How much gravity would it take to crush a random collection of rocks into a solid core?

And why are they rocks anyway?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on May 25, 2019, 10:39:54 AM
How much gravity would it take to crush a random collection of rocks into a solid core?

And why are they rocks anyway?
How much of a disturbance would it take to break up a random collection of rocks?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 25, 2019, 11:10:05 AM
How much gravity would it take to crush a random collection of rocks into a solid core?

And why are they rocks anyway?
How much of a disturbance would it take to break up a random collection of rocks?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry, I wasn't clear.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on May 25, 2019, 10:30:30 PM
Just a guess, but it might be like dust accumulation on a bigger scale. The dust on the surface is always loose, but as more dust gets piled on top, the aggregate weight from above causes the inner material to be compressed tighter and tighter into a solid mass.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on May 25, 2019, 10:46:55 PM
And why are they rocks anyway?
What else would they be?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on May 25, 2019, 10:51:58 PM
And why are they rocks anyway?

What else would they be?

(https://i.imgur.com/LaByhV0.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 26, 2019, 06:04:03 AM
And why are they rocks anyway?
What else would they be?
Not rocks.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on May 26, 2019, 11:31:19 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7cnKeZWwAEhSx9.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 26, 2019, 02:27:54 PM


A Solar Prominence Eruption from SDO  (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap190526.html)
Image Credit & Copyright: NASA/Goddard/SDO AIA Team
Explanation: One of the most spectacular solar sights is an erupting prominence. In 2011, NASA's Sun-orbiting Solar Dynamic Observatory spacecraft imaged an impressively large prominence erupting from the surface. The dramatic explosion was captured in ultraviolet light in the featured time lapse video covering 90 minutes, where a new frame was taken every 24 seconds. The scale of the prominence is huge -- the entire Earth would easily fit under the flowing curtain of hot gas. A solar prominence is channeled and sometimes held above the Sun's surface by the Sun's magnetic field. A quiescent prominence typically lasts about a month, and may erupt in a Coronal Mass Ejection (CME) expelling hot gas into the Solar System. The energy mechanism that creates a solar prominence is still a topic of research. After our Sun passes the current Solar Minimum, solar activity like eruptive prominences are expected to become more common over the next few years.

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on May 27, 2019, 12:49:02 AM
I've been wondering is that loose rocks and boulders on the surface, or is it loose rocks and boulders all the way down?

The quoted excerpt describes it as "likely a loose conglomerate rubble pile asteroid".
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on May 27, 2019, 03:22:05 AM
I've been wondering is that loose rocks and boulders on the surface, or is it loose rocks and boulders all the way down?

The quoted excerpt describes it as "likely a loose conglomerate rubble pile asteroid".
Cool. Having a time with my eyes these days.  >:(
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Gigabyte on May 28, 2019, 03:29:32 AM
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/PoisedWholeAtlanticridleyturtle-mobile.mp4
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on May 31, 2019, 05:01:02 PM
https://youtu.be/OTcdutIcEJ4

Maybe more of a commercial than science, but still...
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on May 31, 2019, 05:04:06 PM
Actually, I think this guy was first...

https://youtu.be/SND3v0i9uhE
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 06, 2019, 08:47:03 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/l5XUNkT.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on June 06, 2019, 08:50:42 PM
Those names should not be blocked. Those people need to be educated.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on June 08, 2019, 10:19:25 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/qlZfFfp.jpg)

Fuck the medical industrial complex, I'LL be the one to decide how many hours my boner should last.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on June 08, 2019, 01:34:51 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBikbn5XJhg

Absolutely fantastic! Among the best spent 10 minutes on Youtube in a long while!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on June 08, 2019, 07:16:43 PM
I got a couple of minutes into it before I couldn’t take it any more.  It’s just a montage of space clips having nothing at all really to do with the eras they’re supposed to represent and missing out on all of the most important events at least in the early universe.  And its depiction of the Big Bang was insulting.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 08, 2019, 07:29:05 PM
I got a couple of minutes into it before I couldn’t take it any more.  It’s just a montage of space clips having nothing at all really to do with the eras they’re supposed to represent and missing out on all of the most important events at least in the early universe.  And its depiction of the Big Bang was insulting.

The opening credit sequence for "The Big Bang Theory" was better.

This is not time lapse. That would have been interesting. This wasn't.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on June 08, 2019, 08:23:36 PM
Well it wasn't really a time lapse, but I enjoyed the visuals and I appreciate the idea behind it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on June 09, 2019, 12:45:48 PM
Well it wasn't really a time lapse, but I enjoyed the visuals and I appreciate the idea behind it.

I can't please everyone I suppose. ;)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on June 09, 2019, 01:15:07 PM
Perhaps if I knew less about the history of the universe I could have just appreciated the pretty pictures.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on June 09, 2019, 01:23:10 PM
Then please us fill in with more accurate, educational stuff.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 09, 2019, 01:40:35 PM
Perhaps go back and film it?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on June 09, 2019, 02:01:17 PM
How about something like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwTOusEsR4g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcp6nSCw9mU
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on June 09, 2019, 02:03:34 PM
I will check them out, thanks John Albert! :)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on June 09, 2019, 04:11:27 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/The_New_England_Skeptical_Society.jpg/800px-The_New_England_Skeptical_Society.jpg)

CSICOP conference in 1997.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on June 09, 2019, 05:13:22 PM
The opening credit sequence for "The Big Bang Theory" was better.

The best:

https://youtu.be/4tSQVKlgVJ4
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on June 13, 2019, 11:02:10 AM
(https://www.wykop.pl/cdn/c3201142/comment_hv9MtcmDGw4pLQUC5yBEvAc5zzO3x9jp.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 16, 2019, 09:44:32 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/AQCbraG.jpg)

Quote
@SteffenMalskaer got the difficult task of retrieving our oceanographic moorings and weather station on sea ice in North West Greenland this year. Rapid melt and sea ice with low permeability and few cracks leaves the melt water on top.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on June 16, 2019, 10:30:09 PM
The classic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Oh Henry on June 17, 2019, 04:12:06 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D9RFIR_XoAADS5J.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 21, 2019, 02:21:35 PM
(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1906/AnalemmaSunset.jpg)



Astronomy Picture of the Day (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/)
Quote
Explanation: Today, the solstice is at 15:54 Universal Time, the Sun reaching the northernmost declination in its yearly journey through planet Earth's sky. A June solstice marks the astronomical beginning of summer in the northern hemisphere and winter in the south. It also brings the north's longest day, the longest period between sunrise and sunset. In fact the June solstice sun is near the top, at the most northern point in the analemma or figure 8 curve traced by the position of the Sun in this composite photo. The analemma was created (video) from images taken every 10 days at the same time from June 21, 2018 and June 7, 2019. The time was chosen to be the year's earliest sunset near the December solstice, so the analemma's lowest point just kisses the unobstructed sea horizon at the left. Sunsets arranged along the horizon toward the right (north) are centered on the sunset at the September equinox and end with sunset at the June solstice.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Friendly Angel on June 21, 2019, 04:55:37 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/Ruyoqqw.png)

Any idea what they were thinking with those continents?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on June 21, 2019, 06:09:48 PM
That is bizarre, not only because of the geographic impossibility of the image but because in those particular continents its the first day of winter.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 22, 2019, 03:47:58 AM
They're talking about the thawing of the Arctic, I suspect. Tropical North Pole.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: The Latinist on June 22, 2019, 09:29:09 AM
They're talking about the thawing of the Arctic, I suspect. Tropical North Pole.

If that’s what they’re going for, why are the continents they show Africa and Australia (and in a geographically impossible relation to each other)?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 22, 2019, 09:40:10 AM
They're talking about the thawing of the Arctic, I suspect. Tropical North Pole.
Continental drift?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 22, 2019, 09:49:37 AM
They're talking about the thawing of the Arctic, I suspect. Tropical North Pole.

If that’s what they’re going for, why are the continents they show Africa and Australia (and in a geographically impossible relation to each other)?
Lazy artist syndrome, I believe.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on June 22, 2019, 07:28:03 PM
(https://scontent-gru2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/64992289_2564582390227170_4502676862236884992_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_eui2=AeFsN2NJes9pGcf1GdsQn0VrDR_ZWDsqrNSCc7rx4Lk7qWlKGgvVi1R2mJXzcGx_rT2skLuNC2E40LcaYJ1mcLSYTpVqHXciqvrwprgRwWAvVg&_nc_oc=AQmAijQFT9RT5uxt7Se4WcfvYW2SJXQoT5Kz0YnkZSidMMc95rbzXHeI6P8sdz4ztT0&_nc_ht=scontent-gru2-2.xx&oh=2d67844d8111cbf8d07c50aea5c4a09e&oe=5D87FEFE)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on June 23, 2019, 03:43:51 PM
They're talking about the thawing of the Arctic, I suspect. Tropical North Pole.

If that’s what they’re going for, why are the continents they show Africa and Australia (and in a geographically impossible relation to each other)?

My guess is that's a poor man's South America, not Africa.
Title: AI-generated "nudes"
Post by: John Albert on June 26, 2019, 10:32:10 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/0Zij9Er.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/sxCuCfX.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/fnSXKgS.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/HOtm4y5.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/frauhLX.jpg)

https://boingboing.net/2018/03/28/robbie-barrats-ai-generated.html
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 26, 2019, 11:30:37 AM
Some "art" generated without an "I" at all.  ::)

(https://d7hftxdivxxvm.cloudfront.net/?resize_to=width&src=https%3A%2F%2Fartsy-media-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2FieQd3W1nbyP-ILgwnWtUSQ%252F4088303823_2ae5d0cc73_o.jpg&width=1200&quality=80)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on June 26, 2019, 05:31:25 PM
This is Fountain by Marcel Duchamp, one of the most important pieces in the history of art. The point of this piece is to settle a debate about the definition of art by proving the theory that any object, even mundane, unmodified found objects, can be art if they're presented as art.

It's generally accepted among artists and collectors, that the highest purpose of art is to elicit opinions and invite discussion. When Duchamp turned a urinal on its side and presented it in the context of an art piece, that elicited very strong opinions and invited vigorous discussion. Hence, the urinal serves the same basic purpose as some fine object explicitly created for the same purpose. Because the juxtaposed object is functionally indistinguishable from art, it is art.

The fact that we're still posting photos, and discussing and debating this piece over 100 years later, is proof that Duchamp was correct.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 26, 2019, 06:10:47 PM
The point of this piece is to settle a debate about the definition of art by proving the theory that any object, even mundane, unmodified found objects, can be art if they're presented as art.
And that's bullshit.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on June 26, 2019, 06:42:39 PM
The point of this piece is to settle a debate about the definition of art by proving the theory that any object, even mundane, unmodified found objects, can be art if they're presented as art.

And that's bullshit.

No, it really is not. Fountain was originally submitted in 1917 for a Paris exhibition of the Société des Artistes Indépendants (Society of Independent Artists). Duchamp himself said the purpose of the piece was to test the boundaries of what the museum directors would consider art, in order to gauge their commitment to free expression. He was motivated to do this because 5 years earlier he'd had a painting (Nude Descending a Staircase No. 2 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nude_Descending_a_Staircase,_No._2#/media/File:Duchamp_-_Nude_Descending_a_Staircase.jpg), which eventually became his most famous) removed from exhibit after an unfavorable response.
Title: Re: AI-generated "nudes"
Post by: werecow on June 26, 2019, 07:33:22 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/0Zij9Er.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/sxCuCfX.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/fnSXKgS.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/HOtm4y5.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/frauhLX.jpg)

https://boingboing.net/2018/03/28/robbie-barrats-ai-generated.html

Neural networks are pretty good at recognizing things nowadays, but abstract expressionism is not something they typically excel at. I'm kind of curious how this was done.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on June 27, 2019, 03:16:38 PM
That is bizarre, not only because of the geographic impossibility of the image but because in those particular continents its the first day of winter.

That and the "e" in "Google" isn't tidally locked so there is no way it would line up like that in space.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 27, 2019, 04:37:07 PM
The point of this piece is to settle a debate about the definition of art by proving the theory that any object, even mundane, unmodified found objects, can be art if they're presented as art.

And that's bullshit.

No, it really is not. Fountain was originally submitted in 1917 for a Paris exhibition of the Société des Artistes Indépendants (Society of Independent Artists). Duchamp himself said the purpose of the piece was to test the boundaries of what the museum directors would consider art, in order to gauge their commitment to free expression. He was motivated to do this because 5 years earlier he'd had a painting (Nude Descending a Staircase No. 2 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nude_Descending_a_Staircase,_No._2#/media/File:Duchamp_-_Nude_Descending_a_Staircase.jpg), which eventually became his most famous) removed from exhibit after an unfavorable response.
Still BULLSHIT.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 27, 2019, 05:10:26 PM
The point of this piece is to settle a debate about the definition of art by proving the theory that any object, even mundane, unmodified found objects, can be art if they're presented as art.

And that's bullshit.

No, it really is not. Fountain was originally submitted in 1917 for a Paris exhibition of the Société des Artistes Indépendants (Society of Independent Artists). Duchamp himself said the purpose of the piece was to test the boundaries of what the museum directors would consider art, in order to gauge their commitment to free expression. He was motivated to do this because 5 years earlier he'd had a painting (Nude Descending a Staircase No. 2 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nude_Descending_a_Staircase,_No._2#/media/File:Duchamp_-_Nude_Descending_a_Staircase.jpg), which eventually became his most famous) removed from exhibit after an unfavorable response.
Still BULLSHIT.

Not only do I agree that it's bullshit, but I think Duchamp himself would agree.

It was intended as an insult and a deliberate affront, and, had it not been for the critics at the time, would have been dismissed and forgotten as such.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on June 27, 2019, 05:36:30 PM
It is a celebration of public sanitation, one of mankind's greatest accomplishments.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on June 27, 2019, 10:53:46 PM
And this is how Elon Musk's Starlink is ruining astronomy... And thats just 60 satellites. Imagine the whole 12,000 constellation of Starlink + 10,000 from the OneWeb.... There would be more moving lights in the night sky than stationary stars...

(https://fsmedia.imgix.net/28/2e/58/1c/51f5/4b92/bf6b/a253637cb755/trails-of-the-starlink-satellites-taken-with-a-long-exposure.jpeg?crop=edges&fit=crop&auto=format%2Ccompress&h=1200&w=1200)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on June 28, 2019, 07:00:50 PM
The point of this piece is to settle a debate about the definition of art by proving the theory that any object, even mundane, unmodified found objects, can be art if they're presented as art.

And that's bullshit.

No, it really is not. Fountain was originally submitted in 1917 for a Paris exhibition of the Société des Artistes Indépendants (Society of Independent Artists). Duchamp himself said the purpose of the piece was to test the boundaries of what the museum directors would consider art, in order to gauge their commitment to free expression. He was motivated to do this because 5 years earlier he'd had a painting (Nude Descending a Staircase No. 2 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nude_Descending_a_Staircase,_No._2#/media/File:Duchamp_-_Nude_Descending_a_Staircase.jpg), which eventually became his most famous) removed from exhibit after an unfavorable response.
Still BULLSHIT.

Not only do I agree that it's bullshit, but I think Duchamp himself would agree.

It was intended as an insult and a deliberate affront, and, had it not been for the critics at the time, would have been dismissed and forgotten as such.

What's your evidence it was intended as an insult? Who are you to speak on behalf of Marcel Duchamp? Duchamp himself said he submitted it under a pseudonym because he did not want his established reputation to affect their judgment.

But the truth may be stranger still. More recently, a letter by Marcel Duchamp was discovered which appears to indicate he was not even the submitter of Fountain.  According to the letter, the "ready-made" (found object) had actually been submitted by one Baroness Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven, a lesser-known artist whom Duchamp knew well.

Regardless, the identity of the submitter and their intentions are irrelevant to the conceptual value of the piece. The fact that it has stimulated such vigorous debate and acclaim over the past 100 years is proof that it is not only art, but an example of the best kind of art.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 28, 2019, 07:29:04 PM
Didn't say it wasn't art.

I did say it was bullshit.

Bullshit can be art too.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on June 28, 2019, 11:26:13 PM
That's so sad.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 28, 2019, 11:38:27 PM

What's your evidence it was intended as an insult? Who are you to speak on behalf of Marcel Duchamp? Duchamp himself said he submitted it under a pseudonym because he did not want his established reputation to affect their judgment.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/3671180/Duchamps-Fountain-The-practical-joke-that-launched-an-artistic-revolution.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on June 29, 2019, 06:00:11 AM
(https://thoughtcatalog.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/a-flowchart-to-help-you-determine-if-yoursquore-having-a-rational-discussion.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on June 30, 2019, 08:12:44 AM

What's your evidence it was intended as an insult? Who are you to speak on behalf of Marcel Duchamp? Duchamp himself said he submitted it under a pseudonym because he did not want his established reputation to affect their judgment.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/3671180/Duchamps-Fountain-The-practical-joke-that-launched-an-artistic-revolution.html

That's not evidence that the piece was intended as an insult. That article doesn't even say it was an insult. The article says it was a practical joke. Even if it did say the piece was intended as an insult, the uncited opinion of a journalist is only speculation, not evidence of Duchamp's true intentions.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on June 30, 2019, 05:59:46 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/tyswBBR.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on June 30, 2019, 07:01:51 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/tyswBBR.jpg)
I believe that’s a riff from the New Testament, but I can’t sure chapter and verse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on June 30, 2019, 07:15:33 PM
It's a riff on the "I studied the Blade (https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/i-studied-the-blade)" meme.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on July 01, 2019, 02:30:35 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/Carl_Sagan_1951.png)

Have you heard of this guy? Photo from 1951.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Ron Obvious on July 02, 2019, 01:51:28 AM
I'm terrible at facial recognition but that I had no trouble recognising that one instantly.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 02, 2019, 04:01:01 AM
Mr. Rogers?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on July 02, 2019, 05:34:16 AM
Mr. Rogers?

Please hand over your nerd badge.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 02, 2019, 06:07:08 AM
Mr. Rogers?

Please hand over your nerd badge.
j/k
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on July 02, 2019, 09:08:27 AM
Dude, it's Carl fuckin' Sagan.

Come on now.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on July 02, 2019, 05:52:06 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/UAtCu7p.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on July 02, 2019, 05:57:24 PM
My favorite are always the Nazca lines, because if there were actually flying aliens telling people where to make the lines, they did a really poor job of it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 02, 2019, 07:00:54 PM
Dude, it's Carl fuckin' Sagan.

Come on now.
I watched "Cosmos" the first time through. I knew it was Carl, the pizza guy confirmed it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on July 03, 2019, 05:43:51 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/dSBDJrD.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on July 03, 2019, 04:51:48 PM
Wow, you guys really think a lot about skin color.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on July 03, 2019, 05:10:03 PM
Wow, you guys really think a lot about skin color.
Just because you choose to ignore the fact that "it was aliens" hypotheses always seem to be most popular with things built outside of Europe doesn't mean we think an excessive amount about skin color.

It may just mean you choose to ignore too much.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on July 04, 2019, 03:10:53 PM
Wow, you guys really think a lot about skin color.

Just because you choose to ignore the fact that "it was aliens" hypotheses always seem to be most popular with things built outside of Europe doesn't mean we think an excessive amount about skin color.

It may just mean you choose to ignore too much.

Yeah, that's the point of the joke.

ET intervention is usually invoked to explain the sacred structures of ancient "primitive cultures" who lacked the sophisticated intellectual achievements of the Europeans. As if those cultures were just too stupid to have figured out how to stack big rocks.

Stonehenge is the only European structure that regularly gets attributed to aliens.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on July 04, 2019, 03:50:06 PM
Fair enough, mostly at least.

I don't think ancient Egypt was ever regarded as primitive, though. The Greeks and Romans were impressed, and they considered it an ancient land, and rightly so, as that culture arose millennia before ancient Greek culture and ancient Roman culture.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: stands2reason on July 04, 2019, 05:02:25 PM
This is Fountain by Marcel Duchamp, one of the most important pieces in the history of art. The point of this piece is to settle a debate about the definition of art by proving the theory that any object, even mundane, unmodified found objects, can be art if they're presented as art.

It's generally accepted among artists and collectors, that the highest purpose of art is to elicit opinions and invite discussion. When Duchamp turned a urinal on its side and presented it in the context of an art piece, that elicited very strong opinions and invited vigorous discussion. Hence, the urinal serves the same basic purpose as some fine object explicitly created for the same purpose. Because the juxtaposed object is functionally indistinguishable from art, it is art.

The fact that we're still posting photos, and discussing and debating this piece over 100 years later, is proof that Duchamp was correct.

Piss off.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on July 06, 2019, 06:27:54 AM
Wow, you guys really think a lot about skin color.

Just because you choose to ignore the fact that "it was aliens" hypotheses always seem to be most popular with things built outside of Europe doesn't mean we think an excessive amount about skin color.

It may just mean you choose to ignore too much.

Yeah, that's the point of the joke.

ET intervention is usually invoked to explain the sacred structures of ancient "primitive cultures" who lacked the sophisticated intellectual achievements of the Europeans. As if those cultures were just too stupid to have figured out how to stack big rocks.

Stonehenge is the only European structure that regularly gets attributed to aliens.

Yeah, but, in fairness, before we put it all down to racism, what other well known European structures are there that are as impressive as the ones typically attributed to aliens?

(And also, most European structures would not look "alien" to westerners in the way that pyramids do.)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 06, 2019, 07:12:35 AM

Stonehenge is the only European structure that regularly gets attributed to aliens.
The Pickle comes in second, right?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on July 06, 2019, 07:17:32 AM

Stonehenge is the only European structure that regularly gets attributed to aliens.

The Pickle comes in second, right?

I don't get it.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 06, 2019, 07:43:50 AM

Stonehenge is the only European structure that regularly gets attributed to aliens.

The Pickle comes in second, right?

I don't get it.
The Pickle.

(https://inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2014/08/Foster-Partners-gherkin31.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on July 06, 2019, 08:04:11 AM
The Pickle.

(https://inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2014/08/Foster-Partners-gherkin31.jpg)

https://squirrelmunk.com/2017/11/26/the-elements-of-good-butt-plug-design/ (NSFW)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 06, 2019, 11:21:12 AM
Now you get it.  ;D
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: stands2reason on July 06, 2019, 03:08:19 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/9tgdnKI.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bimble on July 06, 2019, 04:02:30 PM
The Pickle.

(https://inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2014/08/Foster-Partners-gherkin31.jpg)

https://squirrelmunk.com/2017/11/26/the-elements-of-good-butt-plug-design/ (NSFW)

It's called The Gherkin  ;)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 06, 2019, 04:36:56 PM
Bloody colonials.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on July 06, 2019, 06:01:22 PM
I have to admit, it's a cool-looking building.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 06, 2019, 06:13:29 PM
I have to admit, it's a cool-looking building.
Jane Foster had a date there when Thor was off-planet. (It's complicated.)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on July 06, 2019, 07:11:25 PM
Jane Foster had a date there when Thor was off-planet. (It's complicated.)

Sorry, I'm not well-versed on the MCU lore.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 07, 2019, 05:33:47 AM
Jane Foster had a date there when Thor was off-planet. (It's complicated.)

Sorry, I'm not well-versed on the MCU lore.
It's certainly not the most important thing to know these days.  ;)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bimble on July 07, 2019, 03:00:44 PM
Jane Foster had a date there when Thor was off-planet. (It's complicated.)

Sorry, I'm not well-versed on the MCU lore.
It's certainly not the most important thing to know these days.  ;)

Was that the second one? With the big finale at Greenwich? That little joke they put in on the London Underground during the last act is so bad I can't watch the film... it's even worse than the London Underground scene from Skyfall...
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on July 07, 2019, 03:17:43 PM
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The first video is the SGU edition (with appropriate visuals), in the second video Carl Sagan applies the concept to UFOs/aliens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fI1tA6RxGcs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5gw_slOxcY
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 07, 2019, 03:50:58 PM
Jane Foster had a date there when Thor was off-planet. (It's complicated.)

Sorry, I'm not well-versed on the MCU lore.
It's certainly not the most important thing to know these days.  ;)

Was that the second one? With the big finale at Greenwich? That little joke they put in on the London Underground during the last act is so bad I can't watch the film... it's even worse than the London Underground scene from Skyfall...
Yeah, "Thor: Dark World."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Desert Fox on July 08, 2019, 09:56:08 AM
Interesting PBS video on thorium salt reactors
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElulEJruhRQ
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Awatsjr on July 08, 2019, 05:18:30 PM
Interesting PBS video on thorium salt reactors
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElulEJruhRQ

Interesting. I’ve been reading on this. There is metallurgy work needed but they have great potential for mass use.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on July 09, 2019, 01:19:12 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_p-mcUbEZpA
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on July 09, 2019, 08:54:04 PM
(https://i.redd.it/0kvz7p5l1f131.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on July 09, 2019, 09:26:57 PM
(https://i.redd.it/0kvz7p5l1f131.png)

This is pretty interesting.  What I'd also like to see:

Other news outlets (Local TV; Fox News; Local Newspapers - especially mine)

The same chart broken down with the causes of death of people younger than 70; 60; 50, etc.

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: lonely moa on July 10, 2019, 05:04:52 AM
Interesting... more Kiwis kill themselves than are killed on the road.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Gigabyte on July 14, 2019, 07:10:58 PM
https://twitter.com/i/status/1150397159390482432
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on July 16, 2019, 01:14:08 PM
To be precise, Eratosthenes or other Greeks did not figure out that the Earth was not flat, as that was already known, and known among many cultures. What he did was measuring the circumference of the Earth with a high degree of accuracy.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on July 16, 2019, 02:41:36 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/pOWKOOB.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/8YOODPi.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/c4Z1t3z.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: lonely moa on July 17, 2019, 04:17:34 AM
Mormon missions seem to cement the faith or turn the missionaries into atheists.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Gigabyte on July 17, 2019, 10:12:27 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/pOWKOOB.jpg)
All of that could be also said about politics.  Except canvasing has a much better success rate.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on July 17, 2019, 10:24:02 AM
Also except political parties don't make canvassing a condition of membership.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on July 17, 2019, 01:25:12 PM
The lesson here can be applied in many domains and to varying degrees, yes.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: stands2reason on July 18, 2019, 10:21:19 AM
(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/modified_bayes_theorem.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on July 19, 2019, 12:22:27 PM
(https://i.redd.it/6lmyf3ux19b31.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on July 21, 2019, 02:48:32 PM
Take a look at Lake Kaindy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Kaindy) in Kazakhstan. This lake was actually formed in 1911 after an earthquake, so it is by geological time very recent. As a result of this, it has an underwater forest.

(https://www.lakescientist.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/lake-kaindy-2.jpg)

(https://img1.goodfon.com/wallpaper/nbig/4/a9/ozero-kaindy-utonuvshiy-les.jpg)

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/be/52/39/be5239db0eb4123e043c9a180a049d64.jpg)

(https://allthatsinteresting.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/lake-kaindy-underwater.jpg)

(https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/nintchdbpict000307139396.jpg)

I had never heard about this lake until a few weeks ago, and I found it very fascinating.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on July 22, 2019, 03:14:28 PM
This is where petrified wood comes from. Give it a couple million years.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bachfiend on July 22, 2019, 04:49:28 PM
This is where petrified wood comes from. Give it a couple million years.

Only if the submerged tree trunks are covered with sediments before the wood rots away:

https://geology.com/stories/13/petrified-wood/

The fact that it hasn’t happened in the 118 years since the lake formed in 1911 suggests it won’t happen.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on July 22, 2019, 06:47:34 PM
This is where petrified wood comes from. Give it a couple million years.

Only if the submerged tree trunks are covered with sediments before the wood rots away:

https://geology.com/stories/13/petrified-wood/

The fact that it hasn’t happened in the 118 years since the lake formed in 1911 suggests it won’t happen.

Give it a couple million years. You have no way of knowing how much of the wood is already covered by sediment so far. Nor do you know how long it will take the exposed wood to rot. 
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bachfiend on July 22, 2019, 08:05:02 PM
This is where petrified wood comes from. Give it a couple million years.

Only if the submerged tree trunks are covered with sediments before the wood rots away:

https://geology.com/stories/13/petrified-wood/

The fact that it hasn’t happened in the 118 years since the lake formed in 1911 suggests it won’t happen.

Give it a couple million years. You have no way of knowing how much of the wood is already covered by sediment so far. Nor do you know how long it will take the exposed wood to rot.

Yes, but archaeologists do have an idea about how quickly submerged wood rots, based on the degree of preservation of marine wrecks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasa_(ship)

The Vasa wreck is mainly oak.  I don’t know what sort of trees are submerged in the lake.  If they’re soft wood, I’d imagine they’d rot more quickly.

It is an interesting question as to whether the submerged trees will fossilise.  I’d imagine that it would be rare process, going on the fact that most dead animals or plants don’t fossilise, or if they do, are destroyed by natural processes before they’re discovered.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on July 22, 2019, 08:25:03 PM
This is where petrified wood comes from. Give it a couple million years.

Only if the submerged tree trunks are covered with sediments before the wood rots away:

https://geology.com/stories/13/petrified-wood/

The fact that it hasn’t happened in the 118 years since the lake formed in 1911 suggests it won’t happen.

Give it a couple million years. You have no way of knowing how much of the wood is already covered by sediment so far. Nor do you know how long it will take the exposed wood to rot.

Yes, but archaeologists do have an idea about how quickly submerged wood rots, based on the degree of preservation of marine wrecks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasa_(ship)

The Vasa wreck is mainly oak.  I don’t know what sort of trees are submerged in the lake.  If they’re soft wood, I’d imagine they’d rot more quickly.

It is an interesting question as to whether the submerged trees will fossilise.  I’d imagine that it would be rare process, going on the fact that most dead animals or plants don’t fossilise, or if they do, are destroyed by natural processes before they’re discovered.

The wreck of a ship made of oak in salt water has no relation with the evergreen trees submerged in a freshwater lake.

To point is submerged trees are what petrified wood is.

Not sure what the point of your comments are here. You obviously know little about the topic and seem to just be looking for something to be disagreeable about.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on July 23, 2019, 11:10:20 AM
To clarify, even though the lake has the color of a tropical paradise sea, it is in fact very cold, 6 C at maximum. Maybe that helps to keep the trees from rotting?

I don't know if it makes a difference, but the lake is presumably sweet water. The Baltic Sea, where the Vasa ship was for about 300 years, is brackish.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 24, 2019, 04:32:09 PM
To clarify, even though the lake has the color of a tropical paradise sea, it is in fact very cold, 6 C at maximum. Maybe that helps to keep the trees from rotting?

I don't know if it makes a difference, but the lake is presumably sweet water. The Baltic Sea, where the Vasa ship was for about 300 years, is brackish.
Logs lost in the Great Lakes are salvaged routinely. Some are over a hundred years old. Cold water and low oxygen at depth preserve the wood.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 24, 2019, 04:33:26 PM
Okay then.

(https://i.imgur.com/qgjRmul.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bachfiend on July 24, 2019, 09:37:12 PM
This is where petrified wood comes from. Give it a couple million years.

Only if the submerged tree trunks are covered with sediments before the wood rots away:

https://geology.com/stories/13/petrified-wood/

The fact that it hasn’t happened in the 118 years since the lake formed in 1911 suggests it won’t happen.

Give it a couple million years. You have no way of knowing how much of the wood is already covered by sediment so far. Nor do you know how long it will take the exposed wood to rot.

Yes, but archaeologists do have an idea about how quickly submerged wood rots, based on the degree of preservation of marine wrecks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasa_(ship)

The Vasa wreck is mainly oak.  I don’t know what sort of trees are submerged in the lake.  If they’re soft wood, I’d imagine they’d rot more quickly.

It is an interesting question as to whether the submerged trees will fossilise.  I’d imagine that it would be rare process, going on the fact that most dead animals or plants don’t fossilise, or if they do, are destroyed by natural processes before they’re discovered.

The wreck of a ship made of oak in salt water has no relation with the evergreen trees submerged in a freshwater lake.

To point is submerged trees are what petrified wood is.

Not sure what the point of your comments are here. You obviously know little about the topic and seem to just be looking for something to be disagreeable about.


The point is, is that it’s an interesting question as to how dead things that were once living become fossilised.  Being buried is the first and perhaps the most important step.  Until the submerged tree trunks (and a considerable amount of the tree trunks aren’t submerged anyway) and ship wrecks are covered by sediments, they’re still exposed to oxygen and bacteria, causing them to rot away before fossilising.

The Burgess Shale fossils shows that killing immediately by covering sediments facilitates fossilisation.  Living things dying and just lying exposed on the floor of bodies of water tend not to fossilise.

You’re claiming that petrified wood is submerged tree trunks, plus millions of years.  I think that it’s actually wood covered by sediments, plus long time.

The Wikipedia article seems to support my impression, as do the references it lists do too (provided you also include volcanic ash as ‘sediment:’

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrified_wood
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on July 24, 2019, 09:49:05 PM
To point is submerged trees are what petrified wood is.

Fossilization only occurs under some pretty rare conditions, though. Most readily it happens under anaerobic conditions and after rapid isolation from the outside world, usually by burial under silt or volcanic mud or even lava. These trees are literally sticking out of the very clear water into the air, so it's hard to see how that might be the case here. Certainly the parts of the trees that are still submerged but not buried, and anything attached to those parts, are unlikely to fossilize. And the lake is so clear that it's hard to imagine there being a steady stream of mineral rich water to replace the wood.

#not.a.palaeontologist
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on July 25, 2019, 06:18:46 AM
Good thing fossilization is rare lest we have billions and billions of gods peeking out at us from the gaps.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on July 26, 2019, 08:41:05 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/gurqLsL.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on August 02, 2019, 04:48:08 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Manx_loaghtan.jpg/800px-Manx_loaghtan.jpg)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3a/Manx_Loaghtan_Butser_Ancient_Farm.JPG)

Manx Loaghtan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manx_Loaghtan), sheep of the Isle of Man (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isle_of_Man).
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on August 06, 2019, 12:49:20 PM
(https://scontent-gru2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/67782067_2440716972633916_5375470425021087744_n.jpg?_nc_cat=107&_nc_oc=AQlEeG5ujUpXBupRshx4sMxxOoTx0Ol83e6RoZBXJ4d5YPaDuozD4bl5mqXniJtWnW0&_nc_ht=scontent-gru2-2.xx&oh=59ad764a76ac494a061adc7bbe71248f&oe=5DA1401A)

(https://scontent-gru2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/67662572_1095713797290988_4135301616188260352_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_oc=AQkwuZAK44DKLh25vFtP3CmEJ_RWXnCuftZ7nBazC0ootMMraP2DUAHJfBeVVnhcABk&_nc_ht=scontent-gru2-2.xx&oh=bc5e68efbedb2fb3ff9f411237487197&oe=5DD3E98F)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on August 09, 2019, 09:02:39 PM
Repeats, I'm sure, but...

(https://i.imgur.com/JswowHA.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/LcyQP6W.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bachfiend on August 09, 2019, 10:44:27 PM
Repeats, I'm sure, but...

(https://i.imgur.com/JswowHA.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/LcyQP6W.jpg)

All very good points.  Peer reviewed journals are much more reliable than mainstream media, but they also need to be taken with a grain of sodium chloride.  Don’t forget that peer review means that 2 or 3 other people can’t find any obvious errors, not that the article is true.  And a study with significant p-values doesn’t mean that the correlation between two variables indicates that there’s causation.  The correlation could still be by chance alone.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on August 10, 2019, 05:55:20 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bdvx92qCMAApJvX.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on August 12, 2019, 12:22:52 PM
https://twitter.com/Ralphium/status/1160242266902061056
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gebobs on August 12, 2019, 12:37:19 PM
Seems a useful metric. Now we know what we need to fill it!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on August 12, 2019, 01:26:07 PM
Seems a useful metric. Now we know what we need to fill it!
They will all be off balance and dance around the road on the spin cycle. ::)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on August 12, 2019, 01:45:32 PM
In the replies to the original, the news station's Twitter also estimates the volume in cash registers and toasters.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Friendly Angel on August 12, 2019, 08:15:58 PM
In the replies to the original, the news station's Twitter also estimates the volume in cash registers and toasters.

3 toasters in a cash register; 5-1/2 cash registers in a washing machine. 
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on August 13, 2019, 02:59:02 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/bvkI1ev.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on August 13, 2019, 06:34:48 AM
Aurora Monroe?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on August 13, 2019, 01:26:58 PM
Saturn Aura

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71DDYBLKJEL._UY560_.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on August 13, 2019, 01:30:25 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/bvkI1ev.jpg)

I wanna know why Saturn's aurora is upside down. I smell fake news.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on August 13, 2019, 01:51:30 PM
(click to show/hide)

I wanna know why Saturn's aurora is upside down. I smell fake news.

The source claims they're "curious about the universe."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 13, 2019, 03:08:10 PM
Alex_Jones.flv

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUIcCyPOA30
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: stands2reason on August 14, 2019, 01:34:03 PM
I don't know why it's titled as such, unless the background music is from one of the older games. (BTW, in the Deus Ex universe, the Illuminati is real)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8kZ3HfeqtA
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2019, 10:34:26 AM
(https://thegodlessswede.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/1157575_644160105605004_40361551_n.jpg)

I am not a pacifist, I do get the need for military defense, as well as honoring military treaties with other countries around the world. But still, imagine if the annual science budgets amounted to at least 25% of the military budget (the societal resources obviously exist), or if the total NASA budgets between 1958 and 2011 were at least twice the military budgets of 2011. Apart from making progress on important issues and boosting the economy, lots of things could have been achieved.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on August 18, 2019, 11:21:35 AM
(https://thegodlessswede.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/1157575_644160105605004_40361551_n.jpg)

I am not a pacifist, I do get the need for military defense, as well as honoring military treaties with other countries around the world. But still, imagine if the annual science budgets amounted to at least 25% of the military budget (the societal resources obviously exist), or if the total NASA budgets between 1958 and 2011 were at least twice the military budgets of 2011. Apart from making progress on important issues and boosting the economy, lots of things could have been achieved.
A good part of the military budget does go to research. But your point is valid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 18, 2019, 01:08:32 PM
[...]

Reminds me think of this one:

(https://i.imgur.com/o4oedMX.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 18, 2019, 09:18:42 PM
(https://69.media.tumblr.com/2be70c6eac5e5e1a30e69429a50c44f9/tumblr_pwdpnon3K41y8qafno1_1280.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on August 18, 2019, 10:36:33 PM
(https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aL0Rq56_700bwp.webp)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: DevoutCatalyst on August 18, 2019, 11:05:19 PM
(https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aL0Rq56_700bwp.webp)

There are cooks, janitors, and other support staff 'living' in Antarctica. Nobody stays very long, it's more like a remote oil rig.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on August 19, 2019, 07:29:18 AM
(https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aL0Rq56_700bwp.webp)

There are cooks, janitors, and other support staff 'living' in Antarctica. Nobody stays very long, it's more like a remote oil rig.
There's one guy who stays all "winter" at the South Pole to tend a telescope that needs liquid helium topped up regularly. He likes being alone I guess. Or maybe halitosis?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: lonely moa on August 19, 2019, 02:52:10 PM
Some countries send their staff to the Ice for 18 months or two years.  There are a lot of people that repeat every summer for specialist  work.  Some people seem to live there.

Mind you, even the seals and penguins spend a lot of time offshore.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on August 19, 2019, 03:38:51 PM
Some countries send their staff to the Ice for 18 months or two years.  There are a lot of people that repeat every summer for specialist  work.  Some people seem to live there.

Mind you, even the seals and penguins spend a lot of time offshore.
Last I checked Purdue sent a team down there every year. I worked removing matrix when I was a student. The rule was "stop when you see something interesting." Bit frustrating.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on August 27, 2019, 06:54:38 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/0z6w1La.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/A8FaZTD.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on August 28, 2019, 01:13:03 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/BUKDpeh.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on August 28, 2019, 12:34:57 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EDB-zykWwAA6UgM.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on September 02, 2019, 12:35:47 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/PyySVxI.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bachfiend on September 02, 2019, 01:38:14 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/PyySVxI.gif)

So the Chicxulub asteroid impacted in the South Atlantic off the coast of Africa?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: bimble on September 02, 2019, 04:45:09 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/PyySVxI.gif)

So the Chicxulub asteroid impacted in the South Atlantic off the coast of Africa?

Yes, and the world is flat...
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 02, 2019, 06:39:54 AM
How did the meteor get through the dome that keeps the air in?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on September 02, 2019, 08:37:54 PM
Pfft. You don't still believe in meteors, do you?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gebobs on September 03, 2019, 10:06:20 AM
How did the meteor get through the dome that keeps the air in?

According to Mark Sargent, per his infamous interview on Oh No It's Ross And Carrie, they get shot through an opening by aliens with a rail gun or something equally stupid.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: stands2reason on September 03, 2019, 10:12:21 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/yxpWvPY.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on September 03, 2019, 05:00:53 PM
Pfft. You don't still believe in meteors, do you?

Not round ones.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 03, 2019, 05:12:37 PM
Pfft. You don't still believe in meteors, do you?

Not round ones.
You can't be Ceres about that.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on September 04, 2019, 04:45:41 PM
(https://miro.medium.com/max/1324/1*dXyeYxjgDeePrLrqKpdCLA.jpeg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on September 08, 2019, 01:30:06 PM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/47/cd/7e/47cd7e0a16e2510f867f4d4cd476d77f.jpg)

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-MA1s13CSklY/VSRGWf76dPI/AAAAAAAAHak/p8wB9Boty9g/s1600/100%2BSwedish%2BKrona.JPG)

(https://wp-media.patheos.com/subdomain/sites/8/2013/07/Kzqy4lo.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Shibboleth on September 09, 2019, 03:23:02 PM
(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1891/5829/products/7_1024x1024.png?v=1551058886)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on September 09, 2019, 03:35:23 PM
That can't be Trump. His mouth is closed.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on September 15, 2019, 09:20:09 AM
(https://external-preview.redd.it/z6TPZF7_T0CYQIpTCi0sHHq--K-Kxm8MAbFEJZeA-5s.jpg?auto=webp&s=3f923beb97f51a5c63f783414d8dd44ee1159d37)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on September 15, 2019, 09:46:43 AM
"There's no such thing as biological race," maybe, but as presented it's as reasonable as saying, "There's no such thing as religion," or, "There's no such thing as money."

Just because something is mostly or entirely a social construct doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 15, 2019, 03:43:44 PM
"There's no such thing as biological race," maybe, but as presented it's as reasonable as saying, "There's no such thing as religion," or, "There's no such thing as money."

Just because something is mostly or entirely a social construct doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Having bad ideas is a social construct. Doesn't mean it needs to exist.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on September 15, 2019, 04:50:31 PM
I agree that many social constructs are bad ideas that shouldn't exist, but that's not a world you can bring about by simply pretending they're already gone.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 15, 2019, 04:54:37 PM
I agree that many social constructs are bad ideas that shouldn't exist, but that's not a world you can bring about by simply pretending they're already gone.
I should have said "persist" instead of "exist".
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on September 15, 2019, 05:02:55 PM
This one's a real hair-ripper.

(https://i.imgur.com/DlhchIp.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 15, 2019, 05:09:03 PM
It's not female-coded. It's idiot-coded.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on September 15, 2019, 05:19:47 PM
It's not female-coded. It's idiot-coded.

Right. That's the kink in the chain. And the distaste is not specifically masculine either.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Ron Obvious on September 15, 2019, 05:26:24 PM
I can't take anyone seriously who uses the expression "hating on". 
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on September 15, 2019, 05:49:56 PM
This one's a real hair-ripper.

(click to show/hide)
It's not female-coded. It's idiot-coded.

Right. That's the kink in the chain. And the distaste is not specifically masculine either.

But here's the underlying problem: according to post-structuralist philosophy, all realities are subjective and entirely context-dependent, so this person's pro-astrology "reality" is no less valid for her than our anti-astrology reality is for us.

That mode of thinking divides people of differing views, which allows everyone's personal illusion of progress to hinder any real, objective progress. In the end, it all comes down to which "discourse (https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/936e/90716ef93cd120365b79af9b6567923168db.pdf)" can garner enough popular and monetary support to prevail in society and the markets. Which is one reason why we now have medical schools teaching pseudoscience (https://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/articles/2011/04/12/medical-schools-embrace-alternative-medicine).
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on September 15, 2019, 06:50:59 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/sTi1vm5.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 15, 2019, 09:00:41 PM
It's not female-coded. It's idiot-coded.
I was born on the same day as Rush Limbaugh and within twenty miles of him.

That proves astrology is bullshit.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on September 15, 2019, 09:11:41 PM
It's not female-coded. It's idiot-coded.
I was born on the same day as Rush Limbaugh and within twenty miles of him.

That proves astrology is bullshit.

Oh, but at what time of day? Half an hour can make a noticable difference to the position of the sun and moon.

Is what I would have said back when I still bought into astrology and taught myself how to draw a natal chart by hand.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on September 21, 2019, 08:19:46 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/TLHVj6I.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 22, 2019, 12:20:20 PM
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/531/710/afd.jpeg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on September 27, 2019, 02:16:40 PM
Clip from a television special from 1958 describing the hazard of climate change:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lgzz-L7GFg
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 28, 2019, 10:14:04 AM
I'm pretty sure that was used as a WTN once.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 28, 2019, 11:11:30 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/xQ8k8qL.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 28, 2019, 12:34:58 PM
The presenter did a lot of the "Bell Science" films. Projector nerds got to see them more than once.  8)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 28, 2019, 03:51:55 PM
(https://arstechnica.com/civis/download/file.php?id=45315&sid=fff38618a61ed0399d21cf6e31e5394e)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 28, 2019, 05:24:40 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/g7VSodx.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/m6LSIsa.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 28, 2019, 06:12:29 PM
Why can't people frame their photos?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on September 28, 2019, 10:06:22 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/D5W7uKh.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 28, 2019, 10:12:15 PM
(https://arstechnica.com/civis/download/file.php?id=45371)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on September 29, 2019, 04:32:01 AM
"..during the thirtieth month of the pregnancy."
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 29, 2019, 01:21:52 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/t75VwjC.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on September 29, 2019, 09:56:13 PM
My experience when reading wikipedia on physics and higher maths topics:

(https://www.dropbox.com/s/kr5tbw77tseoipz/rabbits.PNG?raw=1)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: lonely moa on September 30, 2019, 03:47:04 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/UdrT8j5.jpg)

Exploiting the power of microorganisms to make lovely vegetables.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on October 01, 2019, 01:03:00 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/Q7klp7sl.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on October 01, 2019, 09:13:54 PM
(https://img.izismile.com/img/img11/20181214/640/a_universe_of_space_memes_640_42.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: CarbShark on October 01, 2019, 11:14:31 PM
https://img.izismile.com/img/img11/20181214/640/a_universe_of_space_memes_640_42.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on October 02, 2019, 07:38:20 AM
Congratulations, you successfully pasted the url for the picture in the previous post
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Morvis13 on October 02, 2019, 10:02:02 AM
The URL goes to a 404 so even better.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: arthwollipot on October 02, 2019, 08:46:44 PM
Congratulations, you successfully pasted the url for the picture in the previous post

The picture in the previous post isn't showing for me and never has. I saw it by uploading its URL to Imgur. This is it, if anyone else still can't see it.

(https://i.imgur.com/3dWlptk.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: wastrel on October 02, 2019, 11:35:24 PM
Congratulations, you successfully pasted the url for the picture in the previous post

The picture in the previous post isn't showing for me and never has. I saw it by uploading its URL to Imgur. This is it, if anyone else still can't see it.

(https://i.imgur.com/3dWlptk.jpg)

I got it to load by copy/pasting the link into a separate browser window.  That got it loaded into my browser cache, and now I can view it on this page too.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on October 03, 2019, 05:47:07 AM
Hey, it's just a holey spaceship. Vatican space program?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on October 03, 2019, 03:06:59 PM
(https://i.ibb.co/GsgtGP7/71-D329-F8-1-AB3-4-C4-F-8154-A064-A4-A1-F0-BC.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on October 03, 2019, 04:08:33 PM
Waste of a good spaceship.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on October 04, 2019, 05:23:18 PM
How good a ship do you need to send them on a one-way trip, really? A waste of good fuel, maybe?
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on October 04, 2019, 05:51:42 PM
How good a ship do you need to send them on a one-way trip, really? A waste of good fuel, maybe?
I'd send them to see those reclusive natives in the Indian Ocean and load that ship up with politicians.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on October 05, 2019, 08:54:49 AM
(https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1910/PIA23180_raw.gif)

Quote
InSight on a Cloudy Day (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap191004.html)
Image Credit: NASA, JPL-Caltech, Mars InSight
Explanation: Clouds drift through the sky as the light fades near sunset in this three frame animated gif. The scene was captured on sol 145 beginning around 6:30pm local time by a camera on the Mars InSight lander. Of course, InSight's martian day, sol 145, corresponds to Earth calendar date April 25, 2019. Under the 69 centimeter (2.3 foot) diameter dome in the foreground is the lander's sensitive seismometer SEIS designed to detect marsquakes. Earthquakes reveal internal structures on planet Earth, and so tremors detected by SEIS can explore beneath the martian surface. In particular, two typical marsquakes were recorded by SEIS on May 22 (sol 173) and July 25 (sol 235). The subtle tremors from the Red Planet are at very low frequencies though, and for listening have to be processed into the audio frequency range. In the sped up recordings external noises more prevalent on cool martian evenings and likely caused by mechanical shifts and contractions have been technically dubbed dinks and donks.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on October 05, 2019, 03:23:36 PM
(https://cf.geekdo-images.com/camo/4a9055c721cbfacccc3bd922fff9b803335b9b14/687474703a2f2f332e62702e626c6f6773706f742e636f6d2f2d576a7a796d4a66594952772f54664f48305252553075492f41414141414141415657732f7264723747326841436e342f73313630302f466f7274756e6574656c6c65725f626974732e6a7067)

EDIT:

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR_fCJOZ4BIdL78ikHSVdeChdu3XqmSNrM6yGEd7ROGg-fJP8yJ)

Took me way too long to spot the error.

EDIT 2:

(http://www.magicalmaths.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/funny-math-jokes.jpg)

(https://cdn.iwastesomuchtime.com/91720140143121.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on October 05, 2019, 04:23:41 PM
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR_fCJOZ4BIdL78ikHSVdeChdu3XqmSNrM6yGEd7ROGg-fJP8yJ)

Took me way too long to spot the error.
You can generally start from the assumption that things like this have snuck in division by zero somewhere, and then look for that specifically.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on October 05, 2019, 05:03:37 PM
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR_fCJOZ4BIdL78ikHSVdeChdu3XqmSNrM6yGEd7ROGg-fJP8yJ)

Took me way too long to spot the error.
You can generally start from the assumption that things like this have snuck in division by zero somewhere, and then look for that specifically.

There was a lot of drinking this week (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_October_Festival).
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on October 05, 2019, 08:36:22 PM
(https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?url=https%3A%2F%2Fapod.nasa.gov%2Fapod%2Fimage%2F1910%2Fmoonjupiter100319derekdemeter800.jpg&t=1570322031&ymreqid=4fc1fd91-57d9-c212-1c05-2f028e019a00&sig=giOatnteyHbdW652f.svHA--~C)

Quote
Jupiter and the Moons (https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap191005.html)
Image Credit & Copyright: Derek Demeter (Emil Buehler Planetarium)
Explanation: After sunset on October 3, some of the Solar System's largest moons stood low along the western horizon with the largest planet. Just after nightfall, a pairing of the Moon approaching first quarter phase and Jupiter was captured in this telephoto field of view. A blend of short and long exposures, it reveals the familiar face of our fair planet's own large natural satellite in stark sunlight and faint earthshine. At lower right are the ruling gas giant and its four Galilean moons. Left to right, the tiny pinpricks of light are Ganymede, [Jupiter], Io, Europa, and Callisto. Our own natural satellite appears to loom large because it's close, but Ganymede, Io, and Callisto are actually larger than Earth's Moon. Water world Europa is only slightly smaller. Of the Solar System's six largest planetary satellites, only Saturn's moon Titan, is missing from this scene. But be sure to check for large moons in your sky tonight.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on October 05, 2019, 09:14:32 PM
I recently got to see that for myself for the first time in my adult life through a friend's telescope. That and the rings of Saturn. One of those things that make you go "holy crap it's actually real!". }|:op
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: brilligtove on October 06, 2019, 06:17:26 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/8PWnusq.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on October 06, 2019, 06:24:58 AM
Is it okay to post the APOD images here or should I start a new thread? Either way works for me. (I won't do big blobby clouds of gas, just ones that strike me.)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Ron Obvious on October 06, 2019, 04:55:18 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/YxNSMuT.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Igor SMC on October 12, 2019, 11:27:52 PM
Awesome example of how to lie with statistics:

(https://media.giphy.com/media/RJtURneNvadMoRiPWj/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: werecow on October 13, 2019, 07:47:30 AM
Conclusions aside, there's something very satisfying about that visualization method.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: PANTS! on October 13, 2019, 07:51:34 AM
Unfortunately,  here in the US, we do often vote by "land".
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: gmalivuk on October 13, 2019, 08:54:23 AM
Yeah but even if you adjusted the resulting sizes based on relative electoral college voting power, it would still effectively refute the "impeach this" version of the unedited county map that's supposed to look like the vast majority of the country supported Trump.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on October 13, 2019, 08:56:33 AM
Right, but it wouldn't clear up the problem of how Trump actually got elected in the first place.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on October 13, 2019, 01:18:43 PM
Right, but it wouldn't clear up the problem of how Trump actually got elected in the first place.

On that subject, this would: National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact)

States are signing on to allocate EVs toward the national popular vote winner.  Once signatories comprise a majority of EVs, the legislation activates.

We need 270 EVs.

We have 196 with 90 more pending.

Reference map:

(https://i.imgur.com/Rf4wqxm.png)

Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Quetzalcoatl on October 13, 2019, 04:02:27 PM
I do like this image from their website.

(https://www.theskepticsguide.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/SGU19-EXT-schedule-poster-PRINT.jpg)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: stands2reason on October 13, 2019, 04:45:34 PM
I do like this image from their website.

(click to show/hide)

Their current Alpha Quadrant 6 Youtube channel wallpaper:

(https://i.imgur.com/N9lEtvs.png)
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on October 13, 2019, 11:45:56 PM
Right, but it wouldn't clear up the problem of how Trump actually got elected in the first place.

On that subject, this would: National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact)

States are signing on to allocate EVs toward the national popular vote winner.  Once signatories comprise a majority of EVs, the legislation activates.

We need 270 EVs.

We have 196 with 90 more pending.

(click to show/hide)

Agreed! I am fully supportive of initiatives like this, and my state is already signed on. Yahoo for States' Rights!
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: John Albert on October 13, 2019, 11:49:55 PM
I do like this image from their website.

(https://www.theskepticsguide.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/SGU19-EXT-schedule-poster-PRINT.jpg)

I'm trying to figure out what's going on in that picture.
Title: Re: Post The Science-and-Skepticism-i-est Images You've Got
Post by: Noisy Rhysling on October 14, 2019, 06:13:21 AM
Nova Corp line-up.