Why is Lauren Chen right and Science Insider wrong?
JFL Post-wall roastie says getting pregnant in your 30s is better than in your 20s
Why is Lauren Chen right and Science Insider wrong?
E
Watch her video
I gave Lauren Chen 15 minutes of my time for her to say "I think it's because of this, not because of what Science Insider says." She doesn't prove or disprove anything. Both Science Insider and Lauren Chen are observing that more people drown in the summer, but they disagree on what about the summer causes it.
E
No she says that insider forgot correlation =/= causation and the science didn’t realize that
Watch the video again all of it
But that's not "debunking." That's just saying "You don't know that you're right about why it happened."
If I say ice cream causes drowning, telling me "Correlation =/= causation" doesn't prove me wrong, it just suggests I might not be right. Proving me wrong would be breaking down exactly how drowning happens.
E
It is. Women in their 30s who give birth are more likely to be fit because they’re more likely to exercise or diet or etc. not their maternal age
That's what Lauren Chen seems to think. But again, why is she right and the scientists wrong? She never proves that. She just says "This is what I believe."
D
@Edmund_Kemper watch this
She is apparantly dating a tallfag chaddam. Do you still want to give that trad thot views.
Bro, come on now. Just why?
This comment is true but also false at the same time.
If you're good at finances and can plan your expenditures well then financing a child in your 20s is not hard.
She's from the redpillsphere.
Thankfully many blackpillers regularly invade her comment section when she makes a video on the topic of looks and dating.
IT and normies will ignore this.
But this is actually the case why we're seeing more genetic defects.
Down syndrome actually has been studied and has shown that the older the mother is, the higher the chance of having a child with it.
If you're over 35, you deserve to have your life ruined by a down syndromecel.
E
that video isn't some scientist. just some person talking in a video. also, this is just one "scientist" speaking and some scientists like that video can get things wrong and can confuse correlation with causation. if you watch lauren's video, she points out how the video confuses correlation with causation. just because one tech insider video says something doesn't mean it's biologically and evolutionarily accurate. that's appeal to authority.
ad hominem/identity fallacy
women in their 20s don't have much money because they're busy riding the cock carousel instead while they used to betabuxx very early
Absolutely brutal
E
older moms i think cause autism tooIT and normies will ignore this.
But this is actually the case why we're seeing more genetic defects.
Down syndrome actually has been studied and has shown that the older the mother is, the higher the chance of having a child with it.
View attachment 243894
If you're over 35, you deserve to have your life ruined by a down syndromecel.
Mother age vs child birth with defects has barely been studied, we should be at least thankful we know that having a child >25yo is down sydrome suicide for mother's who want a "perfect boi/girl"
Little to nil money goes into research of mothers having children late, any woman who says that the 30's is the proper time is top tier trash. Bitch, even if you're 30, you got <10 years before your chance of menopause spikes.
And to be honest, that is what we should want, there is clearly an age/mother link to genetic pass on failure. These same women should suffer waiting so long. Fuck them, raise a down syndrome cel, my only hope is that the government reduces your payments.
A classic image for those whom remember:
You keep citing "violations" like this is debate club, but neither you nor Chen are "debunking" anything.
Yes, there are many scientists. Science Insider is backed by science. Maybe there are other scientists out there who disagree with Science Insider. But that has nothing to do with your claims of Chen "proving" Science Insider wrong. She doesn't, she just assumes they're wrong.
@sub8male i bet (((they))) are behind this video
B
Science Insider is an online news media channel, it's not a scientific source. The name is just a label, like "Federal Reserve." There's nothing federal about it (private entity) and there are no real reserves (to back up all of the printed notes).
The video briefly glosses over the health risks to the baby, but intentionally focuses on the purported benefits to the woman, instead of highlighting the harm risks on the baby, such as the much higher probability of developing Down Syndrome as you conceive past the age of 30. It's well established in the medical community that women in their thirties produce far less healthier babies than women in their teens and early twenties. The eggs of young women are just like themselves: young and healthy.
The video itself is leftist propaganda that tries to the push the feminist narrative that a career woman can have it all - that they can compete with men AND have an as good, if not better, family life than a much younger woman who settles in a traditional family role.
Take nothing solely on face value.
The channel name might be a misnomer, but they get their science from scientists. They're like an Infographics Show or something. They themselves might not be the scientists, but why should I believe one of these YouTube channels over the other?
E
i still trust what she says more than the video. i bet other scientists would disagree with the video. the video says that having a baby in your 30s is biologically and evolutionarily better which is only true because women who wait until their 30s have more education it isn't because having a baby in your 30s instead of your 20s is what nature intended.
because one science video who clearly confuses correlation with causation isn't a good source. Just because Chen doesn't have a PHD or whatever doesn't mean she's wrong. Look up identity fallacy
B
I didn't say that you should believe the other video (I didn't even watch it, and don't care, since it's just an opinion response). I'm trying to get you to be cognizant of, not only the source, but the information (types, categories) you're being presented with and how it's being presented.
Like I said earlier, they omitted well known facts like increased risks of babies developing Down syndrome by later year conception.
Get your science straight from the source: the expert or the journal*. Getting the filtered and diluted information from media outlets with agendas is ill advised.
*Noting here that even reputable science journals are not completely free of biases, since they can dismiss controversial research and never have it see the light of day. But they're the best you can do, outside of doing the research yourself.
Last edited:
Just have babies dangerously late in your life so that they are born with physical and mental problems and feed them formula instead of breast milk so they dont develop properly theory
Worthless hole
E
Infinite IQ
But it doesn't mean she "debunked" the video, and that's what we're talking about. That's the whole reason I'm even in this thread. You told me she proved the other video wrong.
D
Because there’s not enough downs kids in the world are there
E
i think she did debunk it. what she says makes very good points against the video. she points out how the video confuses correlation with causation.
E
we're all ugly that's why we're incels
But that's not debunking. She didn't prove the video wrong.
E
prove that
Prove what? The definition of "debunk?"
E
what chen said is way more logical and definitely explains why women who give birth in their 30s are healthier. younger women who gave birth were much healthier in the old days because they became mothers with a house early unlike now where they're busy riding the cock carousel
That's not disproving though. It just "sounds believable" to you. And what's believable is often true, but not always. But disproving means she takes the initial assertions and shows specifically why they are wrong and why her thing is right. She doesn't do that. She just just says "Their thing is wrong because my thing is right."
It's believable that the Earth is round. But "The Earth isn't flat, because it's round" doesn't disprove that the Earth is flat. Taking the logic that says the Earth is flat, and showing it to be false, disproves the Earth is flat.
the wall is a cope tbh
E
believe me, if educated healthy women were giving birth in their early 20s like in the old days, this video would never be uploaded. it is biologically and evolutionarily what nature intended for women to give birth as a young woman, not in their 30s
D
The 2° foid is retarded too tbh
L
And autism isn't common enough.
Well, at least incel forum gets more users in future.
Ps. My mom was in her 30s when I was born and look how I turned out!
E
anecdotal fallacy
Similar threads
Punished Watcher
Users who are viewing this thread
