this post was submitted on 24 May 2025
180 points (95.9% liked)

Science Memes

15145 readers
1593 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ruthalas@infosec.pub 66 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

The labeling on those axes is horrific. A human is apparently about 7 units of "Large" on the "Size" axis, and can piss around 110 units of "Jet" on the "Shape" axis.

What is 7 units of Large Size you wonder? Fuck you. What is 110 units of Jet Shape you ask? Hell if we know. You sure aren't going to.

What are all the unlabeled dots? Who cares. Sample size? "I saw one do it."

[–] Sas@beehaw.org 12 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Also not to forget according to this a cow is more than 10 times as large as a human

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee 2 points 2 weeks ago

And a bit smaller than a dog, slightly larger than a cat.

Did these scientist observe and document a pissing toddler?

[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago

I mean, humans are about 150 or 200 freedom units, and various breeds of cow weigh 10x that or more

[–] flora_explora@beehaw.org 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

With one data point as sample size, it could have been a baby, a huge bodybuilder or anything. Same goes for the ~~human~~ cow. None of this is reliable data and we shouldn't even discuss it here.

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Considering the human here is smaller than a dog and slightly larger than a cat, they apparently picked this subject up at a kindergarten.

[–] flora_explora@beehaw.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

Lol didn't even see that! :D

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 weeks ago

I feel like the three humans and dozens of cicadas are probably skewing the results as well.

[–] oo1 1 points 2 weeks ago

The axes are terrible, I agree.
And I think they managed to confuse a bear for a dog - so kudos to the fieldworker for going out and measuring the bear piss.

But it'd be quite rare for every datapoint on a scatterplot to be individually labelled - in fact if they all can be clearly labelled the sample is on the small side.

The cicada conclusion seems very weakly supported without a better sample for other subgroups. But a more general conclusion about the whole sample like larger insects and mammals tend to do more of whatever Y is, does have some support in this data.