flerp

joined 2 years ago
[–] flerp@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Isn't the point of this that it explains the phenomena that is commonly attributed to dark matter? Therefore wouldn't the things we observe that would point to this be the same things that we observe that point to dark matter? I guess the thing I don't understand is why we would expect to observe something different because of this than what we attribute to dark matter.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago (5 children)

I don't understand any of this so this question isn't snarky but something I'm actually wondering. How would we be able to see "topological defects" in space with telescopes?

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago (3 children)

The brain is a material organ that has some amount of control over the rest of your body. If that organ believes a certain thing, it is not supernatural or spiritual for that to have a material effect on your body.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You're begging the question(s).

As far as we know, matter can't be created or destroyed. Before asking "what created it" you have to demonstrate that it even CAN be created.

And "what set it in motion?" Have you ever seen anything NOT in motion? Everything is moving relative to everything else.

As far as we have observed, there is no such thing as "nothing" or "motionless." To ask a question like how does something come from nothing, or how did things begin to move, you are assuming states that we have never observed to be possible.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 11 points 9 months ago

Just remember that those are the stupid people because they don't understand that sarcasm isn't only about the reader but also the writer. Some people's sarcasm is much clearer than others and for the one's whose sarcasm isn't is heavily noticeable, the /s helps.

Also, whining about non-harmful stuff that people do that isn't what you would do instead of just living your life doing what makes you happy is generally pretty stupid anyways.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago

It doesn't matter if it looked like a real gun, or even if it WAS a real gun. He had a real gun too, should he also have been shot for having a real gun that looked like a real gun?

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago

Where did they say the government handed out credit scores? The meme was pointing out a double standard, not saying the government hands out credit scores.

This entire comment is just you admitting you have below average reading comprehension.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

"Trust me, I could totally answer your question and it would blow your mind and totally convert you. I won't, but trust me I could if I cared to."

Seems like the bible says you're not a very good Christian in that case:

1 Peter 3:15

15But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

YMMV. For me soup sounds like a good idea but I find it annoying to eat so for me personally it is a bad idea.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

But without evolution we wouldn't have bears!

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 89 points 10 months ago (1 children)

And you explained all of that WITHOUT THE OBNOXIOUS GODDAMNS and FUCKIN SCIENCE AMIRITEs

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure if that was supposed to be in agreement or countering what I said.

Over the past few decades, some people have noticed and commented on the enormous death toll that our reliance on driving and the vast amount of driving hours spent on our roads and said that that amount of death is unacceptable. Nothing has ever been able to come of it because of that aforementioned reliance on driving that our society has. Human nature cannot be the thing that changes, we can't expect humans to behave differently all of a sudden nor change their ability to focus and drive safely.

But this moment in time, when the shift from human to machine drivers is happening, the time when we shift from beings incapable of performing better on a global scale, to machines able to avoid the current death tolls due to their ability to be vastly more precise than humans, this is the time to reduce that death toll.

If we allow companies to get away with removing sensors from their cars which results in lower safety just so that said company can increase their bottom line, I consider that unacceptable even if the death toll is slightly lower than human driven cars if it could be greatly lower than human driven cars.

view more: ‹ prev next ›