Black Culture Discussion Thread

The antivaxx spreadneck people actually have a political voice and followers with economic means. They need to stop being lazy and present data.
This!

Scientists don't object to their ideas being refuted, but YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE.

You can't say you're a fan of science if you don't understand that. Proving what you assert is the most basic and most important aspect of the scientific method.
 
There has also been instances where valid research has been discarded because further research proved the previous conclusion to be incorrect. My thing with "science", as people put it, is they look at it as definitive and finite when its ever evolving. Scientist or "Experts" say this, and people will speak of it as gospel just to be 10 years down the road, "Oh well actually.." We do not have all the answers. Its ok to question. Thats what science is essentially.

The problem is even scientists themselves dont treat knowledge as being finite so this point is moot. Science is about a constant search for the best possible solution to a given problem. If knowledge were finite scientists would cease to exist.

Gospel is a weird term to throw at a culture that exists to find better ways of doing things and better answers to life's mysteries. This aint the bible, scientific knowledge is perpetual in both directions ever since our first ancestors learned to make tools.
 
The problem is even scientists themselves dont treat knowledge as being finite so this point is moot. Science is about a constant search for the best possible solution to a given problem. If knowledge were finite scientists would cease to exist.

Gospel is a weird term to throw at a culture that exists to find better ways of doing things and better answers to life's mysteries. This aint the bible, scientific knowledge is perpetual in both directions ever since our first ancestors learned to make tools.
Yea but REGULAR people will treat information given to them buy scientist as finite. "The experts said A, B, C and D. How could you question it?!" "The same experts said 1,2,3 and 4 and we later found out it wasnt true."

Rage comic png images | PNGWing


and thats pretty much sums up the past 3 year of being American.
 
This!

Scientists don't object to their ideas being refuted, but YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE.
Except that's not true. You mentioned the theory of relativity so you probably know how that was ridiculed because it challenged the status quo of ether, even tho there was no evidence of that and it was just accepted as groupthink. Science is not some altruistic pursuit devoid of ego, agenda, corruption etc. Suppression of evidence/research has been an issue in that community. Science itself can never be wrong. It's scientists that are frequently wrong about science
 
Last edited:
Yea but REGULAR people will treat information given to them buy scientist as finite. "The experts said A, B, C and D. How could you question it?!" "The same experts said 1,2,3 and 4 and we later found out it wasnt true."

1692201609354.png


and thats pretty much sums up the past 3 year of being American.

This redneck magical thinking behavior precedes the last 3 years. Laymen and D students getting emboldened and questioning scientists in lazy fashion is nothing new. Its been festering in many cultures with the propensity for antiintellectualism and social progress for years. The problem here is the overall scientific illiteracy of American society and subcultures. You wanna question science, they welcome it. Use better science to do so. Instead so far its been some Karen housewife or construction worker regurgitating challenges to best scientific practices without providing data.
 
Except that's not true. You mentioned the theory of relativity so you probably know how that was ridiculed because it challenged the status quo of ether, even tho there was no evidence of that and it was just accepted as groupthink.
It is true.


But as Einstein’s theory noted, there was no experimental confirmation for the substance. There was no proof it existed, other than that the scientific establishment had accepted the concept.

In other words, and like many ideas of that time, the pseudoscientific idea of ether was being passed off as actual science until Einstein challenged it WITH proof (in the form of a coherent model that answered many questions that ether couldn't), just like Galileo challenged the Catholic clergy regarding the concepts of geocentricity and flat earth (conclusions based on interpretation of religious texts) with evidence (his observations and logically drawn conclusions), later verified by Magellan's journey.

The same goes for chemistry (science) vs alchemy (pseudoscience): alchemists thought that urine could turn into gold but could never prove it; we know today that yellow pee is just a sign of dehydration.

A lot of "ancient science" wouldn't even qualify as such today, because when we talk about it, we're really talking about the scientific method (hypothesis - experiment - conclusion).

Suppression of evidence/research has been an issue in that community.
I won't disagree; it can be an issue. I also think that there are many folks who claim to be silenced after it is shown that they can't back up their claims.
 
It is true.




In other words, and like many ideas of that time, the pseudoscientific idea of ether was being passed off as actual science until Einstein challenged it WITH proof (in the form of a coherent model that answered many questions that ether couldn't)
What? That's exactly what I said. They ridiculed and ignored his theory even tho he provided evidence and they had none for their ideas. What's not true is you saying that scientists don't do that. You can't speak on behalf of all scientists like they all have the same intentions.
 
"No one believed Einstein" :lol:

PhD students spend 7+ years getting people to believe them, thats how science works. You dont just put an idea out there and expect everyone to believe you. Einstein followed a strict, disciplined regimen of data collection and the scientific method to get people to believe him. I doubt redneck antivaxxers are able to do that.
 
Plantains been a staple in Africa and the diaspora.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think it was the case in the U.S. Especially the South. Wonder why that was.
 
Cause most of the regions in the U.S aren't adequate enough to grow bananas, much less Plaintans.
Florida can and does. Slavery was predominant in the south with its large plantations.

Most likely it wasn't as profitable as other crops so it wasn't grown much and folks in the states weren't exposed to it.
 
Florida can and does. Slavery was predominant in the south with its large plantations.

Most likely it wasn't as profitable as other crops so it wasn't grown much and folks in the states weren't exposed to it.
Florida and Hawaii are the only places that have the climate. And even then, you're still limited with Florida cause it isn't always opportune year round and Hawaii is a fairly new state, plus it's distance etc doesnt necessarily make it worth while.
 
Last edited:
It hasn't been lost on me how eager certain demos of black people will highlight every piece of racism in different industries, but whenever it's beneficial to their point suddenly it's blasphemous to question "science" or "scholars"

Scream from the top of their lungs how these institutions are racist from their inceptions, then in the very same breath deny & discredit anything that isn't stamped by those very same institutions. Gotta love it
Not quite the same but similar idea…

Like when some black people will rightly call out the police for racism but in the same breath oppose blacks arming themselves…..because you’re going to call those same racist cops is that correct?
 
Like when some black people will rightly call out the police for racism but in the same breath oppose blacks arming themselves

Most people don't want to live without policing; they want better, fair policing and equitable justice. I don't know how directing folks to gun stores addresses the issue of poor, discriminatory policing or the racial component of police work.
 
Most people don't want to live without policing; they want better, fair policing and equitable justice. I don't know how directing folks to gun stores addresses the issue of poor, discriminatory policing or the racial component of police work.
It doesn’t. What it does do is create a deterrent and allows you some control over a situation where the cops won’t reach in time. The point I’m making is why complain about the cops but then be overly reliant on them?
 
Back
Top Bottom