It is currently Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:04 am



Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 I am making this a thing, who is with me? 
Author Message
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 1:38 pm
Posts: 322
Reply with quote
Just FYI, I work for Oculus and am good friends with Palmer. He really doesn't care about these. :P I would hardly call these shoops bad PR, considering anybody could make them and they likely won't leave MTBS anyway. Not like it'd affect the company, either.


Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:44 pm
Profile WWW
One Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:22 am
Posts: 4
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Reply with quote
Couldn't let this slip.

wuliheron - Dawkins accused of pseudo-science? I would like to hear who these respectable scientists are.


Sat Sep 22, 2012 12:34 am
Profile
Certif-Eyable!

Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 10:32 pm
Posts: 1139
Reply with quote
Granted, Dawkins' talking about "memes" only confuses the concept of evolution by natural selection, since memes and genes reproduce and change completely differently. And other scientists have pointed that out. But that's very different from accusing him of pseudo-science. Dawkins is still universally recognised as an expert on evolution (although there are a great many experts in the field, since it is such an integral part of biology), and an expert on teaching of evolution and the promotion of science.

Dawkins traditionally hasn't liked to acknowledge group selection, (ie. genes for looking after your relatives being more likely to be passed on, because your relatives have similar genes to you, etc.) even though it makes obvious sense, but he's slowly coming around.

The only real pseudoscience you could accuse Dawkins of, is the pseudoscience that all evolutionary biologists are forced to participate in, because the real science says things that are politically unpalatable and unacceptable. For example, if you think honestly about evolution, it's clear that some form of Eugenics is going to be necessary even if you only want the human race to stay the same without improving or deteriorating, because without evolution the natural trend is towards "replicative fading", and we currently have a system of dysgenics where people with the best genes have the least children (watch Idiocracy). It would be politically unacceptable for Dawkins to come out and say that though (although other braver scientists have, and promptly been fired).

Then there's the scientific Elephant in the room that's even more unpalatable and unacceptable... race. It's very clear that there are different subspecies of Homo Sapiens, known as races, that evolved quite separately in completely different climates and environments for tens of thousands of years to suit the local conditions. Worse, some races of homo-sapiens (eg. white people and Aborigines) interbred with non-human species (eg. Neanderthaals), while other races interbred with different non-human species (eg. Denisovans), that have been separate for at least hundreds of thousands of years. All of which has extremely inconvenient and unpleasant connotations, so "respectable" scientists like Dawkins wouldn't touch it with a 20 foot barge pole. (Some scientists like Walter and Crick, or Schockley do go there though).

Overall though, Dawkins is a true scientist at heart, and I doubt you'd find many scientists that would disagree. Don't judge scientists by how politically "respectable" they are though, or you'll get good politics and bad science.


Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:33 am
Profile
Sharp Eyed Eagle!

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:38 am
Posts: 425
Reply with quote
2EyeGuy wrote:
Granted, Dawkins' talking about "memes" only confuses the concept of evolution by natural selection, since memes and genes reproduce and change completely differently.
The Selfish Gene contains a fairly explicit description of Genes and Memes, and in what ways they are similar and in what ways they differ.
2EyeGuy wrote:
Dawkins traditionally hasn't liked to acknowledge group selection, (ie. genes for looking after your relatives being more likely to be passed on, because your relatives have similar genes to you, etc.) even though it makes obvious sense, but he's slowly coming around.
I suppose you may not have actually read The Selfish Gene, because that is EXACTLY what he takes several chapters to explain (genetic imperatives for altruism, and how it relates differently to diploid and haplo-diploid species). Mainly, that Group Selection makes predictions about allele occurrences in populations that are not actually found in nature (or in artificial populations), and that altruistic (i.e. detrimental to the individual, beneficial to the group) traits are still selected for on a genetic level. It doesn't make 'obvious sense', because it doesn't really work.


Sat Sep 22, 2012 8:46 am
Profile
3D Angel Eyes (Moderator)
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:18 pm
Posts: 11394
Reply with quote
Guys, this is a thread about funny joke pictures. Way to get serious...

_________________
check my blog - cybereality.com


Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:31 pm
Profile
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 4:41 am
Posts: 247
Reply with quote


OMG amazing graphics and all new character animation system... looking good! :D


Sat Sep 22, 2012 5:01 pm
Profile
Certif-Eyable!

Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 10:32 pm
Posts: 1139
Reply with quote
cybereality wrote:
Guys, this is a thread about funny joke pictures. Way to get serious...


OK... fine:

Image

Happy now? :)

BTW, I think Dawkins would probably enjoy an Ocular Rift.


Sat Sep 22, 2012 11:38 pm
Profile
3D Angel Eyes (Moderator)
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:18 pm
Posts: 11394
Reply with quote
OK, fair enough.

_________________
check my blog - cybereality.com


Sun Sep 23, 2012 9:43 am
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 5:20 pm
Posts: 84
Reply with quote
Nogard wrote:
benz145 wrote:
Why hasn't anyone 'shopped Palmers Face onto Gabe and vice-versa yet?


As per your request please find enclosed; Palmer and Gabe face sawp.

Image


Oh god... it's more horrible than I imagined. What have you done.


Mon Sep 24, 2012 8:35 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 5:20 pm
Posts: 84
Reply with quote
wuliheron wrote:
LOL, everybody's a comedian with photoshop. :lol:

The inventor of the term "meme" loves nothing more than wordplay and has been accused of spreading pseudo-scientific B.S. by respectable scientists.

Palmer seems like a great guy from everything I've read, knows exactly what he is doing, has support from serious heavyweights in the industry, has a great product, and the last thing he needs is amateur PR spread by misguided fans that might spoil a good thing.


You mean Dawkins?


Mon Sep 24, 2012 8:37 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 5:20 pm
Posts: 84
Reply with quote
2EyeGuy wrote:
cybereality wrote:
Guys, this is a thread about funny joke pictures. Way to get serious...


OK... fine:

Image

Happy now? :)

BTW, I think Dawkins would probably enjoy an Ocular Rift.


Way to bring it back on track!

Ocular Rift? Fine name for the consumer version!


Mon Sep 24, 2012 8:40 pm
Profile
Certif-Eyable!

Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 10:32 pm
Posts: 1139
Reply with quote
benz145 wrote:
Ocular Rift? Fine name for the consumer version!

Sorry, I meant Oculus Rift.


Mon Sep 24, 2012 11:36 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by STSoftware.