ITT science vidya

I'm still doing simulations in this game to this day. Using files from the original site moved from computer to computer on flash drives. I know it's available on Wikipedia, but it's more fun this way.

Too bad it's made by a furfag.

How many hours do you have in KSP?
How much did you pay?
How many games have you gotten better $ per hour out of?

I'm disappointed they drastically changed the game around 0.18 but I have gotten ~200 hours for $15 so I'm not bitching about it

Fuck off, kike

Thats fine with me. Furfags are usually talented.

I am not falling for that satan!

Stop role playing, Holla Forums.

Jews literally invented physics itself and are all powerful beings of cosmic scale.

Autism is a hell of a motivator. I wouldn't call furfags talented. Just dedicated which sometimes is more important than talent.

...

...

furry.science/

Thanks for making me smarter

In Germany shit like that was considered "Jew science," so I'm not surprised that stormfags adopted the same retarded stance.

I got it discounted and haven't touched it in a few patches. I hear they started integrating mods like deadly re-entry and remotetech but only going for a half-assed solution that'd bring so much shame onto them that if they were Asians they'd seppuku

...

...

What if science was a meme?

Ironically that is the same jew science that was a major reason they lost the war.

No but seriously that post is beyond retarded.

The game said they're trying to achieve what Spore failed at. Progress is ok so far. Too bad it won't be finished in my lifetime with all the stuff they have planned

Pretty much your average day on the chans.

...

There were a million Java chemistry/sand games. I remember playing that shit for hours as a kid.

Hey there, kike. Enjoy being executed for crimes against humanity when James Hansen admits in court that AGW doesn’t exist.

I didn't know science is something that someone can admit is real or not.

I swear this shit's getting too common these days. I'm not into KSP but I've seen way too many other games I like go that way. Devs need to be way more laissez-faire with game-wide balance changes and reworks.

...

Get the science toy mod

...

AND CHARLES DARWIN ADMITTED EVOLUTION WAS A LIE ON HIS DEATH BED!
TAKE THAT EVILUTIONISTS

Actually this is a really funny thought.

One thing I can never get over is how creatively bankrupt furries are. Always, ALWAYS some sort of vaguely canine/feline thing with neon colors. Not to mention stuff like this isn't proper artificial life, it's only being simulated at the most superficial level.

Creatures did it properly, Grandroids is going to fucking space in comparison by simulating the brain itself.

What the fuck am I watching?

Pick one and only one.

Steve is completely off his rocker, but it seems kinda necessary to a certain extent to accomplish what he is. Genius and madness, and all that.

It's not rocket science m8.
Why do idiots put politics above science?

Politics makes more money.

Isn't this basically Cubivore

No, it doesn't. Science makes far more money.

The problem is, general advances in science don't guarantee that YOU will be the one that makes that money. Taking a kickback or telling people what they want to hear from a position of faux authority, on the other hand, is pretty much a direct deposit into whatever account you want.

>that feel when you are in it

Cubivore has predetermined body types that you get based on what color enemies you eat. This is randomly generating and iterating on body types based on how well they function you fucking MORON.

This makes me wonder why more games haven't had natural selection put into it. It wouldn't be too hard to do. No mans sky could have put it in if the devs weren't lazy and stupid.

And yet you can’t comprehend the simplest fucking things about thermodynamics.

Yes, climate changes. But there is absolutely no evidence that humans are having any impact on the climate whatsoever. In order to establish an actual human impact in a statistically significant way, you must show a modern trend that deviates from a baseline of appropriate duration. Because geologic processes spanning millions of years are responsible for tremendous amounts of variation in global temperatures, an appropriate baseline must necessarily include millions of years of data to account for this variation. Not only are we not in a period of “record high temperatures,” we are in one of the coldest periods in the past 65 million years.

ONE

There is absolutely no evidence that current temperatures are outside the trend of totally natural variation, and all attempts to make it appear that way are misleading you by truncating the data to a sample of statistically insignificant size. And then they apply their misleading, exponential curve-fits and smoothing effects for dramatic purposes.
The earth had had ice caps for maybe about half of the time over the past 500 million years. The picture shows rapid periods of melting and re-glaciation over periods of a few thousand years. There is nothing abnormal about current melting rates.

TWO

The sea level has been rising at a very steady and predictable rate over the past 8-10,000 years since the emergence from the last major glacial period with no deviation at all from this trend even as humans began industrializing. When environmentalists show you graphs going back 50-100 years of rising sea level data, they omit the fact that this is both on-trend and completely expected.

THREE

We have no actual data that indicates that climate is in any way behaving abnormally, much less due to human impact. The only thing we have is a hypothesis that CO2 affects climate in a meaningful way, which is what climatologists attempt to model. But those models make terrible predictions.

FOUR

If your hypothesis consistently churns out inaccurate predictions–no matter how many times you tweak the knobs and change little fudge-factors here and there–then your hypothesis is shit and must be discarded. Morons who believe in this garbage have no understanding of basic epistemology, let alone science–and that goes for the so-called “scientists” peddling this mystical bullshit.
CO2 is only hypothesized to have the impact on global climate that the alarmists claim. But this has failed to be demonstrated in two major (but related) ways. First, carbon dioxide levels are currently being measured at several hundred ppm higher than measured from ice core samples. Now, it must also be cautioned that you can’t necessarily compare these two sets of data because they represent two different methods of measurement, and have other potential biases. However, even assuming that its true that CO2 levels are much higher–and that they’re caused by human activity–current temperatures are not deviating from the normal historical trends in line with CO2.
A doubling of preindustrial CO2, absent any feedbacks, would result in a maximum forcing of +1.2 ºC. Everyone agrees on this point because it’s a simple computation given the physical characteristics of CO2 which is well mixed in the atmosphere.
Actual warming, again absent feedbacks, would likely be much less due to bandwidth overlap between CO2 and H2O, something that we understand but find difficult to model (H2O levels vary dramatically day to day and even hour to hour with regional weather).

FIVE

The General Circulation Models, and the IPCC, predict 2-8 ºC of warming because AGW theory assumes a positive H2O feedback. They assume that if CO2 causes a little warming, the atmosphere will hold more water vapor which will lead to a lot of warming until a new equilibrium point is reached.
The warming predictions cover such a large range because everyone assumes a different average feedback rate. Again, modeling H2O in the atmosphere is extremely difficult because it varies so much with weather.
Every GCM based on this assumption has failed to model temperatures for the past 15 years. They are all trending too high. In the late 1990s, the modelers themselves stated that if they missed their predictions for more then a decade that would falsify AGW theory.
There is no data to suggest a positive H2O feedback either now or in Earth’s past. Indeed, we cannot model some periods in Earth’s history with an assumed positive H2O feedback. It would appear that Earth’s atmosphere is remarkably adept at dampening forcings from either direction and does not amplify them.
If there is no positive H2O feedback, we literally have nothing to worry about. The average climate change believer knows none of this. Politicians, citizens, activists, and surprisingly even a lot of scientists are literally ignorant of the theory and the math. In their mind, it’s simply “CO2 = bad” and “experts say we’re warming faster then ever.” The more you know.

SIX

Not only are current temperatures not outside the normal trend, we are in one of the coldest periods in the past 65 million years. Also, current temperatures (at the peak of the current 100ky cycle) are actually lower than past 100ky cycles, meaning that we are expected to either warm further just by way of natural variation or we are in an unusually cold peak period.
Second, climate models that use CO2 as a major driver for global temperatures are not producing accurate predictions for global temperatures. This is at least good initial evidence that the alarmist stance on the CO2/climate hypothesis is false. Notice that current temperatures are in no way deviating from normal trends. and that the two “scary red dots” are not observed data, but “predictions.” But, as we already know, the observed data is wildly lower than the predictions. These people are completely full of shit.

Short version for:
ROAST IN HELL, YOU MOTHERFUCKING SACK OF SHIT. YOU WILL BE EXECUTED FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY FOR PERPETUATING A LIE RESPONSIBLE FOR GENOCIDE.

Neat

wtf I hate science now

Thats because those kind of calculations require a lot more complex algorithms than whats already in the game. I'm also talking out my ass as I don't know about said algorithms.

Kek. You are retarded and don't know shit about science or even basic logic.

Try living in places without it like Africa.

But Holla Forums hates science, OP. What are you doing?

In all seriousness, what's wrong with this?
And I hate when big companies try and dodge on paying what they're supposed to.

I never got why people hate "big Pharma".
They literally save millions of lives a year.
Outside of insane conspiracy theories what is wrong with them? This is coming from someone who is normally doesn't trust big business but modern medicine is literally one of the greatest things of the last 100 years.

I don't know if there is a DL link anywhere but this looks cool.

This one has a demo you can download.

Spore
:^)
I wish I was dead.

I liked ksp but it is youtube / reddit bait

I don't know about your corner of the world, but in Europe there has been scandal upon scandal. Drugs causing malformations in children or straight up deaths, that big pharma knew were dangerous but commercialized anyway because can't lose that sunken money. Evidence of them bribing doctors to peddle their shit also abounds.

...

Every time.

how about this?
store.steampowered.com/app/476530/

It also simulates swimming, jumping and ect though.

user pls.

Why act like this is rare these days? This always happens.

Reported for obvious shill. The sources are in the images.
Reported for obvious shill.

It is meaningful when we are trying to look at climate in the last 100 years.
Are you trolling or pretending to be retarded?
No they aren't.
5/10. Got me a little upset.

I remember this shitposter from earlier threads.
He will call anyone who asks for a source a shill. It got to the point where there were like 15 people asking for one.

I don't necessarily hate big pharma but I think the belief is that they sell ineffectual drugs meant to keep people coming back for more for the rest of their lives. Why cure a sickness when you can keep someone sick and make good money? Not that I believe that, just that i'm pretty sure that's the thought process behind hating big pharma.