caze Posted November 11, 2015 Author Share Posted November 11, 2015 Make that: Learning about science is for everybody. Doing science is for scientists. Talking about scientists. Didn't we have some Sapolski videos for this subject? cool video, seems to cover all the bases. highlights that eugene doesn't know shit about what geneticists do and don't know about the impact of social factors. eugene is obviously a crazy person, and it's a waste of time carrying on with this. i love when a bunch of white people start getting really interested in genetics. that's never gone wrong before. yeah, fuck trying to cure hereditary diseases and shit. this is a cool story about one of those swapped at birth sets of identical twins: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/12/magazine/the-mixed-up-brothers-of-bogota.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugene Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 sapolsky basically tears apart past behavioral genetics research (and other similar shit science) using very similar arguments i presented,many times word for word, research that you believed was completely valid until a few days ago, and the only thing you took from it is that it proved me wrong about the fact that some scientists in those fields are not complete hacks? just lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted November 12, 2015 Author Share Posted November 12, 2015 sapolsky basically tears apart past behavioral genetics research (and other similar shit science) using very similar arguments i presented,many times word for word, research that you believed was completely valid until a few days ago, and the only thing you took from it is that it proved me wrong about the fact that some scientists in those fields are not complete hacks? just lol. you're making lots of assumptions about what I do and don't believe. you don't have a fucking clue mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivy Zemura yvI oo ii oo Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 This is ridiculous Look at the russian fox experiment You can go ahead and just keep pretending that's irrelevant though and that humans aren't animals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted November 13, 2015 Author Share Posted November 13, 2015 foxes are only animals tho, humans are magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivy Zemura yvI oo ii oo Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 foxes are only animals tho, humans are magic. Foxes don't have immaterial souls like us superior humans /s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugene Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 sapolsky basically tears apart past behavioral genetics research (and other similar shit science) using very similar arguments i presented,many times word for word, research that you believed was completely valid until a few days ago, and the only thing you took from it is that it proved me wrong about the fact that some scientists in those fields are not complete hacks? just lol. you're making lots of assumptions about what I do and don't believe. you don't have a fucking clue mate. just look at your fucking first post in this thread where you still try to defend the idea that twin studies can have some merit. This is ridiculous Look at the russian fox experiment You can go ahead and just keep pretending that's irrelevant though and that humans aren't animals what's ridiculous is to assume that because both humans and animals are biological creatures and evolution and bla bla bla than they must necessarily share some features, and specifically behavior. might as well expect snakes to produce idms on fruity loops and humans to shed skin and lay eggs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivy Zemura yvI oo ii oo Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 sapolsky basically tears apart past behavioral genetics research (and other similar shit science) using very similar arguments i presented,many times word for word, research that you believed was completely valid until a few days ago, and the only thing you took from it is that it proved me wrong about the fact that some scientists in those fields are not complete hacks? just lol. you're making lots of assumptions about what I do and don't believe. you don't have a fucking clue mate. just look at your fucking first post in this thread where you still try to defend the idea that twin studies can have some merit. This is ridiculous Look at the russian fox experiment You can go ahead and just keep pretending that's irrelevant though and that humans aren't animals what's ridiculous is to assume that because both humans and animals are biological creatures and evolution and bla bla bla than they must necessarily share some features, and specifically behavior. might as well expect snakes to produce idms on fruity loops and humans to shed skin and lay eggs. The fact that animals and humans differ in behavior proves behavior is influenced by genetics since they only differ by genetics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugene Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 that's a stupid argument to make, especially at this point. no one's doubting that genetics are "responsible" for formation of various biological organs, one of which is a human brain that makes humans capable of things other species aren't, therefore comparisons to other species is often meaningless and assumption for similarity in causes for behavior is baseless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GORDO Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 Just logged in to express my sadness that tumblr-think has inffected WATMM too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcofribas Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 thread officially GORDOd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted November 14, 2015 Author Share Posted November 14, 2015 just look at your fucking first post in this thread where you still try to defend the idea that twin studies can have some merit. that's because they do have merit, and sapolsky never claimed otherwise in that video. pointing out things we can do to improve on them doesn't completely invalidate them. you have a very poor grasp on how the scientific method works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugene Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 you just don't fucking get it huh, the criticism saposlky presented makes their findings very likely to be completely baseless due to flawed methodology, it's not like they now explain 10% percent instead of 60% of variance of behavior due to that criticism, they can't conclusively prove ANY genetic effect at all because it all can be all alternatively explained pretty easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.