Conversation

Notices

Embed this notice
:njp: - kill ✕ owl - (owl@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:49 JST :njp: - kill ✕ owl -
Do you guys remember that discussion we had and we concluded that black “””””women””””” had significantly much more testosterone than most other women and as a result, had little to no sexual dimorphism with their men when they are:
- Shaved of the head
- Obese (many of them are anyway)
- Or are tall?
I found something funny. In the Tokyo Olympics the Namibians weren’t allowed to compete in the women’s 400 meter sprint because of their insanely high testosterone levels, that they were supposed to regulate with medication, so much so that they were determined to have the same advantages over the other women, that men have over women.
Look at this. No sexual dimorphism. What the hell.
In conversation about a year ago from poa.st permalink
Attachments
1. Warning, a spookoid comes for your wallet at last.
  https://i.poastcdn.org/0b7571dc9c49a59d6cc30d6e38a6e3c04c29f0bef852ffa9dcafac7760070abf.png
- Embed this notice
  :njp: - kill ✕ owl - (owl@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:33 JST :njp: - kill ✕ owl -
  in reply to
  @roboneko @scarlet @diresock @Elliptica @Tripp I own my threads, yes.
  and want to control who can reply to what
  Splendid idea. I’m blocking every Bae.st user I come across.
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. Untitled attachment
- Embed this notice
  ?? Humpleupagus ?? (humpleupagus@eveningzoo.club)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:33 JST ?? Humpleupagus ??
  in reply to
  This reply was unauthorized, you owe me 15 ducks.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  :njp: - kill ✕ owl - (owl@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:36 JST :njp: - kill ✕ owl -
  in reply to
  @scarlet @roboneko @diresock @Elliptica @Tripp They’re long because you’re very good at presenting a facade but actually say nothing of value, often contradicting yourself in your rambling. You came into my thread, you’re tagging me, and are now misrepresenting what I’m saying in a proper demonstration of what I’m conveying about you.
  Some course correction for the uninitiated: it isn’t that this dumbass’ posts are “too long.” Bae.st, ladies and gentlemen.
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. Untitled attachment
- Embed this notice
  Neko McCatface v2023 :verified::makemeneko: (roboneko@bae.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:36 JST Neko McCatface v2023 :verified::makemeneko:
  in reply to
  @Owl @scarlet @diresock @Elliptica @Tripp
  
  > You came into my thread
  
  REEEEE mastotard detected. this is exactly the mentality the fediblock crowd has. they've got this entire proposed system for *authorizing replies* that they want to extend AP with because they're a bunch of gay fuckwads who think they "own" threads and want to control who can reply to what
  
  https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/fep-5624-per-object-reply-control-policies/2723
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: socialhub.activitypub.rocks
    
    FEP-5624: Per-object reply control policies
    
    source: fep/fep-5624.md at main - fep - Codeberg.org --- authors: @Claire status: DRAFT dateReceived: 2022-08-23 --- FEP-5624: Per-object reply control policies Summary Sometimes, users may want to share an information or a story without inviting replies from outside their circles or from anyone at all. In particular, individuals may want to restrict who can reply to them in order to avoid “reply guys” or limit outright harassment, while instutions may want to disable replies on their p...
- Embed this notice
  Scarlet :02_dance: (scarlet@bae.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:37 JST Scarlet :02_dance:
  in reply to
  @Owl @roboneko @diresock @Elliptica @Tripp
  Don't care. Nobody is forcing you to read. Don't like it, me or people like me, don't pay us any attention, don't say anything, ignore us. I promise you, you'll be happier not interacting at all. You would have been better served taking a shit in the bathroom than having to tell me my posts are too long. I know they're long, I don't care. I like them that way.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  :njp: - kill ✕ owl - (owl@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:38 JST :njp: - kill ✕ owl -
  in reply to
  @scarlet @roboneko @diresock @Elliptica @Tripp You write a lot but like your friend here, actually say little to nothing.
  You get lost in the weeds writing whole-ass books that contradict themselves.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  :njp: - kill ✕ owl - (owl@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:39 JST :njp: - kill ✕ owl -
  in reply to
  @scarlet @diresock @roboneko @Elliptica @Tripp I’ll go blind if I ever roll my eyes this hard again because of Bae.st users.
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. Untitled attachment
- Embed this notice
  Scarlet :02_dance: (scarlet@bae.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:39 JST Scarlet :02_dance:
  in reply to
  @Owl @roboneko @diresock @Elliptica @Tripp
  Please do.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Scarlet :02_dance: (scarlet@bae.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:40 JST Scarlet :02_dance:
  in reply to
  @diresock @roboneko @Elliptica @Owl @Tripp
  Thing is, let's say you close down academic research as it exists today, and let the internet autists do it instead. You're eventually just gonna end up with the same thing again, just not taking place in universities.
  The peer-review process is just a fancy word for what internet autists do, try their best to debunk a claim. As the autism-review process will grow, you'll start seeing the same things appearing. You'll have autists collaborating and co-authoring their original research or debunking YouTube videos. You'll have autists seeking prestige, and gaining it. You'll eventually have autists who will have the trust of their peers because of their successful work, and autists who will seek to leach on that success to get a head start in their autism career.
  
  As for private institutions, they tend to be a lot more greedy, looking for immediate results, and may be less interested in long term research, even if it may end up critical for even their own survival. You're not gonna get manufacturing industries interested in studying if by any chance we might be destroying the planet through pollution. We've seen time and time again how the private sector is more than willing to either hide research, or create fake studies to distract you from the fact that they're slowly killing you or giving you cancer. Just one example of many:
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnJSHdEP1N0
  
  So relying on the private sector is not a solution, and switching to internet autists is at best a temporary mend, as the corruption will begin anew, because it is simply human nature. Whether it's the current academic researchers or the future internet autists, we need to learn to hold these people accountable and to levy severe criticism when their failures or lies have large negative impacts on society. So why delay the inevitable and wait for the autist takeover of research for us to act, when we could do it right now when it comes to academia?
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. How Teflon Poisoned the World
    
    from Georg Rockall-Schmidt
    
    Hello! This is the story of how Polytetrafluoroethylene, brand name Teflon, has poisoned almost the entire world with Perfluorooctanoic acid, PFOA, which is ...
- Embed this notice
  Dire Sock :verified: (diresock@freespeechextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:41 JST Dire Sock :verified:
  in reply to
  @scarlet @Elliptica @Owl @Tripp @roboneko I'm not sure it's worth preserving anymore.
  The various industries and internet autists are conducting better research and development on a fraction of the budget.
  
  Academia isn't worth it in regards to most fields at this point.
  
  Reminds me of that piece of shit "video games cause violence" professor (I don't remember the name).
  He would co-sign anything that suggested the connection exists, but wouldn't write any papers about it himself.
  
  That way, he would lend credence to the paper by adding his name to it, while also not being punished when the paper was retracted.
  Hundreds of papers, cited thousands of times... and zero consequence.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Scarlet :02_dance: (scarlet@bae.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:42 JST Scarlet :02_dance:
  in reply to
  @diresock @Elliptica @Owl @Tripp @roboneko
  Because if we don't take these matters A LOT more seriously, and a lot quicker than we currently do, then we're gonna see yet another category of human activity collapse to the corrupt communist woke dogma and to complete incompetence, and we're gonna have another part of Western society that will become not only completely useless, but actively detrimental to our well-being and prosperity.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Dire Sock :verified: (diresock@freespeechextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:43 JST Dire Sock :verified:
  in reply to
  @scarlet @roboneko @Elliptica @Owl @Tripp Many "academics" still take Freud's work seriously.
  Some fields are just rotten to the core.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Scarlet :02_dance: (scarlet@bae.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:43 JST Scarlet :02_dance:
  in reply to
  @diresock @roboneko @Elliptica @Owl @Tripp
  Let me be clear about something, just so nobody misunderstands my intent. I don't want or plan on throwing away science as an institution, or the peer-review process. But I do advocate that we start levying some HEAVY criticism on how people have conducted themselves so that maybe, just maybe, someone will start feeling some guilt and shame and try to do better.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Scarlet :02_dance: (scarlet@bae.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:44 JST Scarlet :02_dance:
  in reply to
  @roboneko @Elliptica @Owl @Tripp @diresock
  The issue isn't that papers are being retracted. The issue is that we're discovering that some of these papers are not new. We're discovering that research that became the foundation of a lot more research in their fields, for many many years, were filled with fraud. We're not talking about a paper that got published a few months back and then retracted. We're talking about things like the Alzheimer case, where amyloid plaque was deemed as the cause of the disease, and only recently it has been proven wrong, well after we've wasted decades of research man-power on trying to remove amyloid plaque buildup in Alzheimer patients, with little if any improvement on their condition.
  
  Sure, in some sense it's just business as usual, and you always relied on the peer-review process to weed out either fake or faulty research, and papers getting rejected and retracted now is no different. Or at least shouldn't be. But we're now seeing evidence that peer-review has failed HARD in the not recent past, and it's failing a lot now, with publications lowering their standards for anyone who's willing to pay money, and researchers not really being that interested in doing replication or "debunking" work, because you're not gonna get any fame from that. You can't look at the Grievance studies fiasco and not notice how nobody gave a shit at trying to falsify the dribble. And don't give me the "Peter Boghossian and co. only got accepted by low importance publications", 1) their papers should not have been accepted ANYWHERE, 2) their peers should have tore apart those false studies IMMEDIATELY. Neither happened. Their papers did get published, and I think I've even heard their dribble was praised.
  
  And what did we see from the scientific community in general as a response? Deflections, red herrings, refusal to take responsibility, and blaming the people who exposed the corruption.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Neko McCatface v2023 :verified::makemeneko: (roboneko@bae.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:45 JST Neko McCatface v2023 :verified::makemeneko:
  in reply to
  @Elliptica @diresock @Owl @Tripp this is usually a misconception of people who haven't worked as researchers. there was never a time that you could trust a single paper on its own. there has always been fraud. honestly it would be weird if science were an exception to that since fraud exists for literally everything else humanity does
  
  future work builds on past work. there's always the risk of wasting time doing something that you thought would work but it didn't because you were fed bad data. because of this researchers are extremely cynical when reading new papers
  
  5,000 scientific research papers have been redacted? out of how many though? the context is missing there
  
  where it becomes concerning is when politics gets involved and people start losing jobs, grants, or professional licenses for publishing "wrong" results
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  :njp: - kill ✕ owl - (owl@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:46 JST :njp: - kill ✕ owl -
  in reply to
  @roboneko @diresock @Tripp It’s just another roundabout attempt at emasculating White people in the end. Almost 5,000 scientific research papers have been redacted amidst the currently ongoing replication crisis, you should trust the “official explanation” much less than you do now. Ever since science became The Science™, nothing has become trustworthy.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Anime Wong (elliptica@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:46 JST Anime Wong
  in reply to
  @Owl @roboneko @diresock @Tripp The recent issues with the LK-99 superconductor, as well another physicist who was forced to retract several papers this year, has show that this problem has largely even reached physics. Can't trust anyone anymore.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Neko McCatface v2023 :verified::makemeneko: (roboneko@bae.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:47 JST Neko McCatface v2023 :verified::makemeneko:
  in reply to
  - Dire Sock :verified:
  - Graf von Tripp
  @diresock @Owl @Tripp cope? it's an interesting mechanistic explanation. biology is crazier than anything the maddest engineer could possibly come up with it's incredibly fascinating to learn how involved bits of it work
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  :njp: - kill ✕ owl - (owl@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:48 JST :njp: - kill ✕ owl -
  in reply to
  - Graf von Tripp
  @Tripp I’m well aware that it’s old news, what wasn’t old news was that bit from the Olympics. They’re saying that the “scientific explanation” for this is because of melanin and sun exposure.
  “[The] p53 [gene] in keratinocyte skin cells can activate the pituitary gland and hypothalamus if the skin is exposed to ample sunlight (UV-B light in particular…). That in turn, causes increases in LH/FSH that trigger testosterone, estradiol and progesterone.”
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Dire Sock :verified: (diresock@freespeechextremist.com)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:48 JST Dire Sock :verified:
  in reply to
  - Graf von Tripp
  @Owl @Tripp Reads like "socio-economic reasons" levels of cope.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Graf von Tripp (tripp@poa.st)'s status on Thursday, 17-Aug-2023 15:22:49 JST Graf von Tripp
  in reply to
  
  @Owl This is fairly old news, its why they chimp as they do. Too much estrogen in the men and the opposite in the women. Also explains why niggers tend to be faggots as well.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink

Public

Conversation

Notices

Feeds