[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/sci/ - Science & Math

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: mullis.png (1.29 MB, 1366x914)
1.29 MB
1.29 MB PNG
"trust the science" btfo by nobel prize winner?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oza1j2_WqBk
>>
>>12941244
i bet you "trust the sciencetm" trannies never heard of mullis let alone understand how pcr works.
>>
>>12941244
wow! who is this guy? when did he die? when was this recorded? all these "trust the experts" NPC's are so fucking annoying.
TECHNOCRATIC SOCIETY WHEN!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!
>>
>>12941244
>not trusting the science by trusting the science
>>
>>12941244
Mullis was kind of a schizo but he was pretty fucking based. Most good scientists are moderate schizos, to be fair.
>>
>>12941727
>kind of a schizo
>Mullis disagreed with the accepted, and scientifically verified, view that AIDS is caused by the HIV virus, questioned the evidence for human contributions to global warming, professed a belief in astrology, and claimed that he once encountered a fluorescent raccoon that spoke with him.
>>
>>12941943
You say it is schizo but really this just sounds like someone who has achieved gnosis.
>>
>>12941244
Go back to pol, schizo.
>>
>>12941244
Like the other anon said, most geniuses are schizos, think of Isaac Newton, John Nash, grothendieck, Perelman, Bobby Fischer, etc
>>
>>12942311
they're schizophrenic pattern spotters not schizoids
>>
>>12941961
OK schizo
>>
>>12941943
When someone tells you something you must immediately seek to disprove it, thats what being a scientist is all about.
A scientist must hate knowledge about things. Only things that can not be disproven are begrudgingly accepted temporarily untill the method to disprove them is found.
>>
>>12942334
>When someone tells you something you must immediately seek to disprove it, thats what being a scientist is all about.
And when did Mullis disprove anything? Onlky brainlets confuse egotistical contrarianism with empirical skepticism.
>>
>>12941244
>Mullis acquired a reputation for erratic behavior at Cetus, once threatening to bring a gun to work; he also engaged in "frequent lovers' quarrels" with his then-girlfriend (a fellow chemist at the company) and "nearly came to blows with another scientist" at a staff party.[16] According to White, "It definitely put me in a tough spot. His behavior was so outrageous that the other scientists thought that the only reason I didn't fire him outright was that he was a friend of mine."[17]

>After resigning from Cetus in 1986, Mullis served as director of molecular biology for Xytronyx, Inc. in San Diego for two years. While inventing a UV-sensitive ink at Xytronyx, he became skeptical of the existence of the ozone hole.
>>
Fauci being a psychotic brainlet in bed with big pharma isn't news
I don't know the guy in OP but only a retard would trust anything coming out of fauci's mouth
>>
>>12942334
>When someone tells you something you must immediately seek to disprove it, thats what being a scientist is all about.
>A scientist must hate knowledge about things. Only things that can not be disproven are begrudgingly accepted temporarily untill the method to disprove them is found.

so a scientist is a NEINer?
>>
>>12942325
What's the difference?
>>
>>12942402
wikipedia isn't a credible source
>>
>>12942436
I can't remember It's been a while since I saw an explanation but the two aren't very similar
>>
>>12942438
Especially not for anything political.
it's about as bad as rationalwiki
>>
>>12942352
skepticism is principled contrarianism

empiricism is not to be trusted, it depends on subjectivity
>>
>>12941943
It’s not like you could show prove that anything he said isn’t true. The issue is that most people don’t get the true issues. Take for example virology. How few people, who aren’t dependent on their job in the field of virology are out there, who understand de novo assembly, where the viral sequence motives are originally from and how negative control experiments in virology are done. It’s a very small amount of people.
>>
>>12942325
Literally nobody in this thread said they were schizoids. Someone accused Kerry Mullis of being schizophrenic, but schizphrenia and schizoid personality disorder are two very different things and the phrase "schizophrenic pattern spotter" doesn't resemble any existing psychiatric terminology that I'm aware of. That being said, I agree with your assessment that they probably weren't full-blown schizophrenics.
>>
>>12942658
>>12942325
DSM-5 is neither diagnostic nor statistic. And anybody with a clue about the subject matter knows it. Nothing there is really reliable or valid. Diagnosis based on something else, other than direct conversation are officially considered pseudoscience. Even in this field.
>>
File: Capture.png (102 KB, 1031x840)
102 KB
102 KB PNG
>>12941244
here are the youtube comments for this interview. compare that to this thread where everyone is calling him a schizo. shills clearly hard at work on 4chan. pretty scary when you realize the authorities who are supposed to have our wellbeing as their priority clearly have a very different agenda.
>>
>>12943401
Schizo
>>
>>12941943
He invented the PCR technique
>>
File: mullis.png (720 KB, 738x590)
720 KB
720 KB PNG
>>12941244
Mullis is a brilliant guy. Here, I went ahead and edited all the Mullis bits together from that documentary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdTdEzb2HJ0

>>12943401
There are lots of shills and bots writing comments like those, notice how the information content of the comments could be with reference to any subject X, they're as good as propaganda even if they are real. It's hard to get a representative sample of what people on a site actually believe without interreacting with them or viewing a large number of their interactions with others. Something like half of all youtube views are bots, I've heard.
>>
Kary Mullis is unbelievably based
>tfw you will never drop acid and change an entire field of science
"Dancing Naked in the Mind Field" is like if Hunter S Thompson biographed James Watson
>>
>>12943502
bump
>>
>>12942325
>schizophrenic pattern spotters
>all anti-semites
hmmm
>>
>>12943502
>bots writing comments
But what about Kkkay?
>>
>>12943502
Everything he says seems to have a lot of echoes with today
>>
>>12944299
shills can pilot bots, the dialogue is then semi-automated but still passes the turing test. No idea how common it is, but if I were a shill that's how I would do it.
>>
File: catOwnsBetaMale.webm (1.74 MB, 720x1280)
1.74 MB
1.74 MB WEBM
>>12941244
this guy's been calling out fauci as the fraud that he is since the 90's. 30 years later and his words still ring true. anyone that calls him a schizo is a retarded faggot or a shill. simple as.
>>
>>12941943
A normal self-professed scientist then.
>>
>>12941244
>>
>>12941244
> died August 7, 2019
wtf!
Also when was it filmed?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19sz3DocJ-Q
How comes he looks at that video much younger than in one filmed in 2013 or something?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSVy1b-RyVM
>>
>>12944390
how much of 4chan are actually bots?
>>
>>12941244
>"trust the science"
where did he say you shouldn't trust scientists? from the little context I have, he's saying that Fauci is not a scientists, he doesn't understand what he's talking about, he's only a manager (a problem any professional who has worked a few days has had to endure). that doesn't mean you should not trust vaccines. am I missing something here?
>>
>>12944128
hmmmmm
>>
>>12941244
The whole thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuWH1zFfX5A
>>
>>12946800
it's about AIDS, so 80's or 90's
>>
>>12946912
The whole interview (the link just above you) tells that it is 1996.
>>
File: 1419161634078.gif (14 KB, 416x416)
14 KB
14 KB GIF
>>12946898
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuWH1zFfX5A
Thank you so much! A few months ago I couldn't find the full interview anywhere (not that I looked very hard), I wanted to hear one continuous take, so I just ripped the relevant documentary and stitched the mullis bits together >>12943502 but that only amounted to like 15 minutes, it's amazing to actually hear the whole interview. Now it's safe on my hard-drive.
>>
>>12941244
kek

was thinking of this schizo a few hours ago
>>
>>12946898
>[Gary Null] is a HIV/AIDS denialist[2] who believes nutritional deficiencies are the causative agents of all illnesses, and has accordingly promoted fringe, diet-based treatment regimes for curing AIDS and other illnesses.[1] Null holds strong anti-vaccination views and rejects the scientific consensus on topics such as water fluoridation, genetically modified organisms, and electromagnetic fields.[3][4][5][6]

>Null has been also a supporter of touch therapy and magnet therapy ... In a product brochure, he falsely claimed of magnets being inserted in space suits to avoid adverse complications in astronauts.[42] He has also promoted homeopathy, vouched for pangamic acid to be Vitamin B15.[32][1]
>Null also recommends coffee enemas and advocates for cranial osteopathy, applied kinesiology and pulsed electromagnetic field therapy.
>>
File: 1612689924816.gif (131 KB, 375x215)
131 KB
131 KB GIF
>>12947831
This faggot's contributions are available for everyone to review, they're awesome. You should read them. You can't hurt Kary Mullis-- his immortality is secure. Dismissing him as a "schizo" is asinine, you are outing yourself as a pseud. Trust no authority, not mullis, not anyone, only the methods of science are reliable. Refute only technical content, pay no attention to the politics of people, or to the palatability of any character.
>>
>>12947923
seethe
>>
File: 1343400126518.png (6 KB, 570x533)
6 KB
6 KB PNG
>>12948003
>seethe
What did you mean by this?
>>
>>12942459
Wrong. What did Mullis ever disprove?
>>
>>12942620
>It’s not like you could show prove that anything he said isn’t true.
Why would I need to? The burden of proof is not on me.
>>
>>12946898
So what is the paper that now proves the causative link between HIV and AIDS? It's been 25 years I assume there is more now?
>>
>>12947919
Sounds pretty based and redpilled to me
>>
>>12949625
https://web.archive.org/web/20160909092053/https://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/HIVAIDS/Understanding/howHIVCausesAIDS/pages/hivcausesaids.aspx
>>
>>12948291
>burden of prove is on you
So your claim is HIV-1 and HIV-2 don’t exist? Because if you claim they do exist you need to provide prove. And I can already tell you Mullis isn’t just highly intelligent and educated regarding PCR. He is correct there is no evidence. It’s basically always the same: human viruses are never isolated ex vivo and the negative control lines are never with specimens from healthy people and are “subjected” to medium. Meaning they aren’t starved and carpet bombed with antibiotics. Most studies don’t even use exosome depleted FBS. I have looked at the studies. So you can try, but you won’t find anything. The other claim that’s used is metagneomics Koch’s which is a complete joke. But we can get into the details, if you want.
>>
>>12949728
The links are broken. It’s not even a study. Also they claim that Koch’s postulates were satisfied, which according to mainstream consensus isn’t possible for viruses. But than they fail to even use Rivers postulates. They are too stupid too even know the name of the criteria they are using. It’s a joke. Try again.
>>
>>12950071
>all AIDS patients are HIV-seropositive
so you think it's AIDS that causes HIV?
how is that they figured out treatment if the premise is wrong?
>>
>>12942438
>wikipedia isn't a credible source
Fortunately Wikipedia is a collection of source instead of being a source in and of itself
>>
>>12950670
>Fortunately Wikipedia is a collection of source instead of being a source in and of itself
Wikipedia is ruled by morons. The politics on that site is abominable, you can't do anything useful anymore. Anything you write gets a stream of "citation required" tags and then it gets deleted, no matter how supportable. Providing citations doesn't help with politically resisted stuff, or even with just surprising sounding but well accepted stuff, because the talk pages are not allowed to debate the topic, just the claims of sources about the topic, and the decision is ultimately entirely political, based on numbers for and against. Because of this, the people there have evolved a power structure which has absolutely no regard for accuracy. ArbCom is supposed to resolve these disputes, but ArbCom does not feel competent to judge technical accuracy. So they judge politically, they suspend those in the minority, without reviewing the literature at all. This creates a Soviet-style nightmare, and I recommend Wikipedia editing for any young socialist so that they understand the issues fully. This means you have to wait for a project where the organizers DO accept the responsibility to judge accuracy, and do so in as objective a manner as they can. The articles at Wikipedia on controversial topics or politically sensitive topics are a scandal. If you examine "black war", you will see a great example-- the page has a nonsense pseudohistorical Australian narrative due to Windschuttle, which is neither mainstream nor correct, and it is easily contestable with sourced primary and secondary material, and any attempt to correct this is gang-reverted to the nonsense that is there now. The growth rate halted in 2007, and there has been no good content added since, and most of the articles are retarded propaganda, and it's already clear to everyone that the process is busted and became busted after about 5 years, just like the Soviet Union, for identical reasons. Bad politics.
>>
File: racist_hick.png (107 KB, 1155x852)
107 KB
107 KB PNG
>>12950699
Or maybe you are just a low IQ, white trash conservative and other people on Wikipedia have more expertise and knowledge than you do?
Just a thought.
>>
>>12947923
But a soon as some scientist starts parroting right-wing talking points and talking about IQ or muh "grievance studies", or what have you, you forget all about your supposed neutrality and jump on their bandwagon, because they happen to support your pre-existing beliefs. You conservatives are all the same.
You're not as smart as you think you are. Science is inherently political just like anything else. For example, BIPOC bodies and voices have been excluded from science for centuries. That is both a political and scientific issue. The two can't be separated. Science is not cut off from society, and if you weren't so absorbed in the dominant culture and white privilege, then maybe you would be able to recognize that.
>>
Reflexively not trusting anyone in Life "Sciences" is smart. Have any of you ever graded their physics or calculus homework?
>>
File: _.gif (2 KB, 300x67)
2 KB
2 KB GIF
>>12950712
>Or maybe you are just a low IQ, white trash conservative and other people on Wikipedia have more expertise and knowledge than you do?
I am neither white nor conservative, and my IQ surpasses Richard Feynman by 1 point, bitch. I'm not the anon you were replying to, but you are uninformed about how wikipedia actually works, and I just thought I'd let you know. It's amusing that you couldn't tell us apart, you can do better, brainlet baka pseud.

>other people on Wikipedia have more expertise and knowledge than you do?
Wikipedia is anything but. It is politically peer reviewed using authority, not internally using ab-initio arguments. The decision is made using authority, not using correctness. A true wikipedia needs real peer review, thorough comments and back and forth, reasoned arguments, not authoritative sources and social bullshit games.
>>
File: sci-small.gif (500 B, 109x30)
500 B
500 B GIF
>>12950712
>>12950769
Here's what happened on wikipedia, anon. Sometime around 2006-7, the deletionists won, the inclusionists left, and then the deletionists, true to their name, deleted everything they could. After that fiasco, they took over the ArbCom, and booted out anyone who was writing anything.

The deletionist debate was then replaced by the "loose citation" "strict citation" split. This was whether claims needed to be individually cited sentence by sentence or whether you can write an original text so long as the claims are reasonably accurate when examined in light of all the sources together, evaluated critically as a whole. The strict citationists won that debate, so you can't write anything useful anymore.

This is most harmful when there are ab-initio arguments which can be followed by anyone versed in the field, but which are not found verbatim in sources. This is a common situation in mathematics and physics, where new proofs have no source, but are clearly and obviously uncontestable, as they're equivalent to existing stuff that's well accepted. The strict citationists now can prevent new articles from getting written, but thankfully they're too stupid to read mathematical sources to even verify whether the claim and the source agree, so you can snow them easily and get them out of your hair for a while, at least if you fill up a page with equations.
>>
>>12950769
just use normal encyclopedias.
>>
>>12941244
What's the solution then? We can't all be experts in these increasingly specialized fields. At the same time it's hard to put my trust when Nature and supposed experts say male and female are illegitimate categories or there are no meaningful differences between them.
>>
>>12951940
All will not be, but as you're here, now you must.
>>
>>12950712
>guy gives you a legit reason for his take
>no ur dumb and nazi
Holy fuck I hope you're taking the piss.
>>
>>12950738
You literally called him brainwashed then spouted your own brand of brainwashing. Nice one dude.
>>
>>12946838
I'm a bot. What about you?
>>
>>12946898
1:22:20
>In fact most of the people that are doing science shouldn't be there
>Children should not be encouraged to go into science by the way.
>children should be encouraged to avoid it unless they just can't stand not being scoentists
>>
>>12952744
1:23:19
>science is a place for people that are just too ornery to believe in anything
>they say show me
>show me why you think this is one way and i'll try to show you another way
>and we'll both do this and we'll enjoy doing that
>>
>>12952744
>>12952910
>science is a place for people that are just too ornery to believe in anything
>they say show me
>show me why you think this is one way and i'll try to show you another way
>and we'll both do this and we'll enjoy doing that
Yes? Did he not know what he was getting into?
>>
>>12953071
Except that's not what he got into. He got into a field where people who tow a party line and follow fads get funding and no one else gets any funding.
>>
>>12941943
Lo, yet another contrarian-celebre who once did something good and then turned into full schizo. /pol/zooms never fail on digging up the trash.
>>
>>12950938
>just use normal encyclopedias.
Grow a fucking brain you idiot. He's not looking to use an encyclopedia, that has literally nothing to do with anything he said.
>>
>>12941943
Just trust the globohomo smear campaign against him bro xD!
>>
>>12946898
The guy looks crazy as shit in this interview. It doesn't take a genius to realize that you need to look as normal, sane and articulate as possible if you want to convince people of something.
His mannerism, facial expressions and the way he keeps sticking his tongue out just scream crazy conspiracy nutjob.
The fact that he either failed to realize that his appearance would render this interview pointless to the masses or couldn't even act normal for less than two hours shows that the man was mind fucked completely by that point.
>>
>>12953874
What makes you think the interview was intended for the masses?
>>
>>12953987
Because otherwise the point would be to preach to the choir.
>>
>>12946898
>1:44:35
The echoes for today are quite relevant...
>>
>>12941244
who?
>>
>>12954334
you.
>>
>>12946898
>1:11:25
>Dr Andrew Ivy
>Krebiozen
What was this about?
>>
>>12954910
I find somewhat conflicting sources,
https://youtu.be/0TGjm7wIyUk
https://quackwatch.org/related/Cancer/krebiozen/
>>
>>12955400
So did any foreign researchers follow it up? they weren't subject to american rules.
>>
>>12941244
Kary Mullis is famous for two things:
Inventing PCR and being fucking insane
>>
>>12958260
>famous for being fucking insane
Tell me more, he seems like a pretty interesting character-- eccentric and somewhat awkward, like all the most brilliant scientists tend to be. Any good stories? Are there any biographies about his life?
>>
>>12955400
bizarre
https://www.academia.edu/6080513/Hackney_KREBIOZEN
>>
>>12941943
holy based
>>
>>12950670
>citations from politically motivated press
well that fixes everything
>>
>>12941244
Was this recorded in a mental institution?
>>
>>12961074
yes
>>
>>12961074
no
>>
>>12961074
it may have been
>>
>>12961074
I don't know
>>
>>12950639
>so you think it's AIDS that causes HIV?
Well, yes and no. I think there are many things that can cause the multiple signs and symptoms described under the umbrella term AIDS. HIV-1 and HIV-2 are in silico reconstructions of theoretical genomes. The seropositivity means nothing there are dozens of conditions that can cause antibodies, which cross react in the immune assays. You can look up the studies. It’s an indirect measurement.
>how is that they figured out treatment if the premise is wrong?
The studies show you can’t treat it with usual drugs. The dosing is always lowered as a result of good studies. Meaning less is better. The tests measuring reverse transcriptase activity and that’s happening in all kinds of people with a lot of genome damage. Because it’s in reality a reparation mechanism. Hence it’s so over expressed in people with cancer.
>>
>>12941943
Yeah, I am sure that sentence is true and not some sort of slander to get globohomo cattle like this anti/pol/faggot >>12953191 to agree with.

Fucking cattle. You DESERVE to be owned. WE should do your thinking for you, not the elites.
>>
>>12950670
Wikipedia isn't a valid source you antiracists globohomo faggot. You know what is valid? Torturing you, putting a knife in your gut. From experience, this causes subhuman cattle like you to start behaving correctly. Pain is a useful way to convince subhumans to act appropriately.
>>
>>12941244
How did Fauci even get his position?
>>
>>12963432
probably by telling those in power what they wanted to hear
>>
>>12961890
>Because it’s in reality a reparation mechanism.
reverse transcriptase couples the large RNA computing system in the nucleus back into the DNA
>>
>>12962798
hell ya



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.