General Science Discussion Thread!

[Time Turner]

Wikipedia's the best source, beating NASA and National Geographic

Regardless of your opinion on Wikipedia, stars such as UY Scuti and Westerlund 1-26 are very clearly bigger than the star you mentioned, and they're all cited with reputable sources.

I acknowledge this, but (s)he should use better sources in the future

...Seriously? Wikipedia is as much of a reputable source as anything else. As long as its information is cited, there's absolutely no harm in citing it. That's like saying that our MarioWiki is worthless, and I can tell you that everyone's work has certainly not gone to waste.

Consider this: Most Universities don't accept papers citing Wikipedia. Hell, even high schools won't in certain cases

...And your point is?

 

[ernesth100]

No I mean like is NASA company working with Google?

 

[User4042]

No I mean like is NASA company working with Google?

nasa was made first

national aeronautics and space administration, i believe

 

[Anton]

If you took the time to actually see if Wikipedia was credible instead of just miming the lectures of highschool teachers from 2008, then you'd see that wikipedia has gr8 references and if you've got an oldschool teacher who doesn't understand how technology progresses you can just cite those direct sources that wikipedia used and just not plagiarize the wikipedia page.

No I mean like is NASA company working with Google?

I still don't understand if that's a real question because I just can't like wow please

 

[ernesth100]

Yes it's a real question!

 

[Anton]

try harder, gurl

 

[User4042]

no, nasa and google are not affiliates because google isn't part of the US government

 

[Dr. Javelin]

no, nasa and google are not affiliates because google isn't part of the US government

BUT WHAT IF THEY ARE?!???!!!!!!?

 

[Rise Up Above It]

Well now I just feel stupid...then again half the people on this thread are using google and yahoo answers to reply so I feel a little better now.

tbh I pulled up the article via googling it to avoid trawling through this particular thread for too long because, oh it's such a wonderful thread.

also ily2 SM347 aren't you a little gem too.

 

[User4042]

no, nasa and google are not affiliates because google isn't part of the US government

BUT WHAT IF THEY ARE?!???!!!!!!?

dundundun

e=mc2
energy=max times the speed of light squared

 

[SpinyMaster347]

Wikipedia's the best source, beating NASA and National Geographic

Regardless of your opinion on Wikipedia, stars such as UY Scuti and Westerlund 1-26 are very clearly bigger than the star you mentioned, and they're all cited with reputable sources.

I acknowledge this, but (s)he should use better sources in the future

...Seriously? Wikipedia is as much of a reputable source as anything else. As long as its information is cited, there's absolutely no harm in citing it. That's like saying that our MarioWiki is worthless, and I can tell you that everyone's work has certainly not gone to waste.

Consider this: Most Universities don't accept papers citing Wikipedia. Hell, even high schools won't in certain cases

...And your point is?

Don't use Wikipedia, use its citations

 

[Time Turner]

Wikipedia's the best source, beating NASA and National Geographic

Regardless of your opinion on Wikipedia, stars such as UY Scuti and Westerlund 1-26 are very clearly bigger than the star you mentioned, and they're all cited with reputable sources.

I acknowledge this, but (s)he should use better sources in the future

...Seriously? Wikipedia is as much of a reputable source as anything else. As long as its information is cited, there's absolutely no harm in citing it. That's like saying that our MarioWiki is worthless, and I can tell you that everyone's work has certainly not gone to waste.

Consider this: Most Universities don't accept papers citing Wikipedia. Hell, even high schools won't in certain cases

...And your point is?

Don't use Wikipedia, use its citations

dude

wikipedia gains its information from these citations

it's basically the same thing

 

[Lakituthequick]

...And your point is?

Don't use Wikipedia, use its citations

dude

wikipedia gains its information from these citations

it's basically the same thing

Because trolls.

 

[Dr. Javelin]

relevant:

 

[Shyghoul]

Wikipedia's the best source, beating NASA and National Geographic

Regardless of your opinion on Wikipedia, stars such as UY Scuti and Westerlund 1-26 are very clearly bigger than the star you mentioned, and they're all cited with reputable sources.

I acknowledge this, but (s)he should use better sources in the future

...Seriously? Wikipedia is as much of a reputable source as anything else. As long as its information is cited, there's absolutely no harm in citing it. That's like saying that our MarioWiki is worthless, and I can tell you that everyone's work has certainly not gone to waste.

Consider this: Most Universities don't accept papers citing Wikipedia. Hell, even high schools won't in certain cases

...And your point is?

Don't use Wikipedia, use its citations

or a person could just use wikipedia itself and make sure the info is cited before using it

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

NASA is inside of Google?

You really didn't get my post.

Don't know what a black hole is?

• Type in Google searchbar.
• NASA is, like the third result.
• Click on the NASA.gov link.
• Read.
• Comprehend.

Consider this: Most Universities don't accept papers citing Wikipedia. Hell, even high schools won't in certain cases

Why:

We advise special caution when using Wikipedia as a source for research projects. Normal academic usage of Wikipedia and other encyclopedias is for getting the general facts of a problem and to gather keywords, references and bibliographical pointers, but not as a source in itself. Remember that Wikipedia is a wiki, which means that anyone in the world can edit an article, deleting accurate information or adding false information, which the reader may not recognize.

This isn't research paper either, so it's okay to link to Wikipedia on a MarioWiki forum conversation. Sheesh.

 

[ernesth100]

They accept wikipedia in my school as long as you use quotes.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

One of my teachers were fine with my using Wikipedia, but he told me to use it to gather general information, but not to cite it.

 

[User4042]

lakituthescientist, hi


so apparently males are more attractive than females in all species, said the great science teacher Mr. W*****.

 

[PeskyPlumbers64]

They accept wikipedia in my school as long as you use quotes.

One of my teachers were fine with my using Wikipedia, but he told me to use it to gather general information, but not to cite it.

My school has always banned Wikipedia. If you use it, your mark would go down SIGNIFICANTLY.

 

[ernesth100]

Your school will be left behind when humans evolve to put everything on the internet.

 

[DragonFreak]

lakituthescientist, hi


so apparently males are more attractive than females in all species, said the great science teacher Mr. W*****.

I am confident that is not all true...I just cannot think of one right now.

 

[Anton]

lakituthescientist, hi


so apparently males are more attractive than females in all species, said the great science teacher Mr. W*****.

I wouldn't say "all species" because it isn't, but the males of a species tend to be more elaborate in order to attract a female for mating. Now, if it were the females fighting for the attention of a male, then they'd be more elaborate. Some species, both sexes look the same. I don't really know the proportions of each mating style but whatever that's the general idea. For an example I guess one is that the anglerfish females are the ones who actually...do anything, while the males, which are dramatically smaller, mate with the females by just attaching themselves to the female's belly and merging with it. Or something.

But it's not all.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

lakituthescientist, hi


so apparently males are more attractive than females in all species, said the great science teacher Mr. W*****.

The Eclectus Parrots would like to have a word with you.

 

[DragonFreak]

Assuming those birds are of the same species, I can't tell which is male or female, because they both look pretty. Unless that is the point.