>is that you gary?
smells like fake gary.
>This is what happens to Russian troops that surrender
waiting to see what happens to nazis that mistreat POWs.
>slavs are inhuman, as proven in ww2
how 'bout you ask a native american about white Christians. KYS you piece of shit.
>I wonder if American "intelligence" was really that blind to this
FFS, get some new material, wouldja? is this copypasta supposed to be bait? LMFAO, your shillmasters are gonna sue you to get their shekels back. watch who you work for.
>Did they kill all the opposing males and make their women and children slave.
not quite, men on horseback with rifles and pistol slaughtered and butchered men women and children armed with knives and bow&arrow. then they slaughtered 100,000,000 buffalo and left their carcasses to rot, just so the peaceful native americans would starve to death. that is, the ones that didn't die after being given blankets covered with smallpox. read a book retard, then KYS.
>Nancy will bring them here
she better hide them REAL good. lotsa russian mob here. they may be gangsters, but they still russian patriots.
heard him say US is last bastion of freedom and democracy. from where i sit, it sure as fuck looks like russia is the last bastion.
fuck off, moishe. don't you have some bloody baby cocks that you want to suck?
>should be Freedom, Democracy and Decency.
what? no more gay pride parades and tranny reading hour in kindergarden?
every day i pray for the end of MSM.
>Emphasis on "last". Russia is apparently the first bastion. The US will have to catch up pretty soon.
if russia is a bastion right now, and the US is not, then russia IS the LAST BASTION. logic much?
by now, they're like part of the carpet. the part where the cat pissed and the dog shit.
now you did it, you stupid son of a bitch, putin's hackers gonna dox you and come for you and make you squeal like a stuck pig, you little jew faggot. i'd pay to watch.
>Semantics, not logic. Who's on first?
i won't engage in a battle of wits with an OBVIOUSLY unarmed opponent. it's poor sportsmanship. fuck off, fuckwit shill.
>How about coming up with a more original taunt?
i wrote that before you were born, fuckwit. people used words long before there was an interwebz.
and in other news, a dog bit a man.
when my nephew told me his school announced that boys could now use the girls restrooms if they "identified" as a girl,
i told him that the next time he had to go, he should walk into the principal's office and piss on his leg,
then tell her that he "identifies" as a dog. he laughed. i laughed. alexa laughed. i shot the alexa. it was a good day.
don't respond to shills, otherwise we might assume you're part of shill team six.
>This would assume that we can faithfully render reality inside of a computer program.
>What makes you believe that humanity is that far advanced?
>They're just guessing like the rest of us.
computationalchemistanon here… molecular modeling IS that good, fren. not perfect, but easily good enough for that.
modeling protein structure generally is not done with dft. to costly (CPU time, RAM), and is not really necessary. 3D shapes of huge biomolecules dominated by electrostatic forces and weak interactions like hydrogen-bonding. MMF usually sufficient for good results.
>We still don't understand why proteins fold in one direction but (normally) not in the other direction.
actually we do. don't pretend that YOU'RE not guessing, asshat. hubris yourself.
>then why do we need experiments?
1) to verify the computational results
2) to refine the computational models
3) because the physical compounds are what we're ultimately after, and those are made in a lab, not a computer
4) because SCIENCE
lab experiments are costly and time consuming. with structures as complex as biomolecules, there can be literally thousands or tens of thousands of possibilities that need to be tested. computer modeling can screen that many candidates in weeks, instead of years. but ultimately, the stuff gets made in a lab.
are you satisfied yet, ASSHAT? or are you just here to waste bread?
RIGHT…. like i can give you a post-doctoral level education in 25 words or less. just the references you ask for would fill a bread, ASSHAT.
you don't even know what chirality means, shillfag. KYS.
anon, i quit responding to this shill, i advise you to follow suit. it's obviously NOT a genuine anon with questions, but a shill. let it starve.
ignore these questionshills. they are NOT anons.
oh wow, you dropped out of an undergrad course. you must be a freaking expert!
>The screening of potential candidates is different from the claim of purposeful design of complex molecules from pure theory.
NO, it's NOT. screening is DONE by the design of complex molecules from theory. you clearly have NO CLUE what you're talking about. GTFOH with your shillshit.
hope you die.
“Once upon a time, I dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of my happiness as a butterfly, unaware that I was myself. Soon I awaked, and there I was, veritably myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man.”
― Zhuangzi, The Butterfly as Companion: Meditations on the First Three Chapters of the Chuang-Tzu
so which is the shoop?
not (You), musk. hope HE dies.
>The folding or misfolding of proteins is what is meant by the term "chirality".
WRONG AGAIN. proteins that have the same sequence of amino acids but are folded differently are NOT examples of chiral molecules, they are diastereomers. now FUCK OFF.
big mike? pls say yes.
there are at least a half dozen websites that use facial recognition to find multiple dopplegangers of you for a fee.
there's NOT an infinite variety of faces.
>Why can't you just admit that theory is insufficient for the design of complex molecule
why don't you just admit that you're an illiterate tard and a shill who has no clue what the big words mean, and we'll call it even then?
that is the correct definition, and it PROVES that chirality has NOTHING to do with proteins folding one way or the other.
if you actually UNDERSTOOD what you copypasta posted, you wouldn't need anyone to 'splain it to you, LUCY.
NOW FUCK OFF FOR GOOD.
>I merely deny your claims to such.
i NEVER claimed omniscience, merely competence in a field in which i've spent decades working, and in which YOU are totally illiterate.
a right-handed glove is still a right handed glove, whether it's folded in half lengthwise, or folded in half across the palm.
chiral molecules are MIRROR IMAGES of one another. folding a protein two different ways does not produce mirror images.
not a matter of chirality.
>I am skeptical of the idea that science has advanced as far as has been claimed here.
says the blind man who doesn't believe in color.
fuck off, asswipe. i did not claim omniscience on the part of my field of research. in fact i specifically and clearly delineated its limitations. you are the one who knows NOTHING about which you speak. before asking me to come down a peg or two, YOU need to get off your fucking imaginary high horse, you pretentious pompous poseur.
>Got it. Thank you for the explanation. It did not require pointing me toward a body of research.
you mean you're NOT a shill, and i actually helped you understand a concept?
>Anon has taken long, winding conversations with geneticists who ultimately admit they can’t really prove double helix
that's a bald face lie. the double helix structure is easily proven by means of x-ray crystallography. if a geneticist says otherwise, they need to go back to school.
>don had a chance.
a chance to WHAT? fix what happened in 63? thanks for proving my point.
>Do you not see this as an opportunity to educate?
no, because you're clearly not interested in an education. you have an agenda, and you pursue it in spite of facts to the contrary.
nor is this the time or place to acquire an education. you're purpose here is obviously something entirely different. so GFY.
>Are you really so convinced that I'm a shill and not just an honest skeptic?
i was NOT convinced you were a shill, or i would not have continued the correspondence, but i WAS "skeptical." honest.
oh… that's very different…. NEVERMIND.
anons, pls attend… this is a convo between supposed "anons" who admit they have no actual science education, discussing what is wrong with science and why it is a failure.
if it walks like a shill team
and talks like a shill team
and SMELLS like a shill team
then it's probably fact checkers from CNN.
are you among the "less than ten?"
>everything you think you know is a lie.
and everything YOU THINK YOU KNOW is paranoid delusional fantasy.
>Why would CNN be bothering with a bunch of fucks on 8kun?
if they're no such agency, they know everybody.
it's radio waves that are reflecting off the underside of the ionosphere and making a complete circle around the earth, to form standing waves. most frequencies interfere with themself destructively, and cancel themselves out. a few certain specific frequencies interfere with themselves constructively and reinforce themselves, forming standing waves with none, 1, 2, 3, …. nodes.
now that i can agree with. and the less i know, the more i remember. past a certain point in one's education, comes the realization that one is not learning something new, one is remembering something one already knew.
"All secrets of nature lie before us in perfect openness. We are the ones who graduate ourselves against them, from blockhead to visionary. There are mysteries, as such, just the uninitiated of every degree." –– Christian Morgenstern (my translation)
*….NO mysteries….
well, i posted a shitload of answers to a shitload of questions anons posed about computational chemistry in relation to the creation of the spike protein. some of them might have been real anons. some were probably shills. so i called out the obvious ones.
IDK for certain what the screenshot is, but i believe it's a radio spectrogram (plots intensity vs frequency). it comes from a website that monitors the schumann resonance. there are several websites that do that. i don't pay much attention. the radio waves originate from lightning strikes. it really doesn't seem to mean much, but some anons/shills seem to like ascribing mystical meanings and powers to it. never say never, but this is one thing to be fairly skeptical about.
>One troy once of gold = 28.3495 grams.
One troy ounce (oz t) equals exactly 31.1034768 grams.
FUCKWIT.
28g is an ordinary (avoirdupois) ounce
if you really believe viruses are fake, you're not smart enough to be a shill, you're a retard.
PROVE plato was a jew. we're waiting.
after a lifetime in higher ed, i have NO patience left for conceited illiterate fuckwits. you want a pat on the head and a patient explanation of why your OPINIONS are a bunch of shit, pony up $640,000 because as fucking stupid as you are, it's gonna take at least 8 yrs to get your head out of your ass.
project much?
>Then why are you still wasting your time talking to me?
so soros will waste more of his money paying you to come here and shill. you are the one who accomplishes nothing.
anons read my posts AND yours, and anons can discern which of us is the real deal, and which is a piece of shit.
>Learn to differentiate between "belief" and "skepticism".
skepticism is, BY DEFINITION, belief. asshat.
well, if you poll the rest of the shills…..
>Not an economist, btw,
trips confirm you're not an economist, you're an even bigger fuckwit than that. who else posts bullshit that is WRONG when it takes two seconds to find the correct number before hitting reply?
>That's not enough proof for you Jew, would you like a DNA sample from Plato?
calling anyone who objects to your BULLSHIT a jew only proves that YOU are the jew. maybe there is a lock of his hair in some museum somewhere. wouldn't THAT be great? you could show everyone how smart and honest and patriotic you are. in the meantime, how about the tiniest bit of historical records that prove or even support your asinine assertion? well, we're waiting…..
>kek, brain-dead mongrel!
only brain-dead mongrels believe they can lump people together based on occupation and assume they all share the same beliefs, skills, knowledge, etc.
were IS hunter? you sure you know who's protecting him?
>Unbelief is belief.
disbelief is belief in the opposite.
i believe there is life on mars is a BELIEF.
i believe there isn't life on mars is also a BELIEF.
it's NOT orwellian double think. YOU are an idiot and an obnoxious asshole. that is MY belief, based on the evidence of YOUR WORDS.
>Then why are you still wasting your time talking to me?
it's an excuse to avoid doing our income taxes.