pimento64

Yes, that is indeed different from asspulling baseless speculation, in much the same way that an offhand comment is different from a concerted effort at attacking your field. Can I point out that you just tried to refute me making fun of you by agreeing with me, or will that also undermine Mr. Always Right's field of expertise?

Every time somebody pontificates about history instead of just saying "we don't know", another right-wing revisionist history book gets catapulted onto the NYT bestseller list.

What possesses a person to highlight over 50% of a passage instead of just drawing a line in the margin?

Their entire voting base is doggedly fixed on the idea of turning up to vote even if they hate the candidate or even the current party platform. At the other end you have people who who consider not voting to be a high-minded protest, who only turn up for candidates who are ideologically pure enough: in other words, voters who represent no threat at all and can be ignored. Is it any wonder that those who only care about having power cater to the people who will still vote for you while you piss on them?

Discovery's characters are somehow simultaneously boring yet also obnoxious jackasses. The writers of the show apparently thought Star Trek would be more interesting if everyone in the future had, instead of professionalism and humanism, histrionic personality disorder and chronic hemorrhoids.

Fun fact: Kellog was proud to say he never consummated his completely celibate marriage. Also, he had multiple intense enemas every day that blasted pressurized water against his prostate at rate of 17 gallons a minute (or slower when it was the more viscous yogurt enema).

10 × 0 = 0

Yes, I, too, understood the point of the comment.

In the end, Calvin stopped thinking.

It is, but keep in mind that if you don't intentionally misinterpret things you know to be jokes, you won't get to act smug about how awful they are. It's good to see we have some people bringing the core aspect of reddit culture here.

Calm down.

Telling people "calm down" is a very unconstructive de-escalation tactic because it has no substance. People respond much better if you address specific conduct, explain a potential consequence, ask for something else, and then give space.
For example, when someone needs to calm down, I tell them "You'd better fix that attitude problem of yours before it gets you into trouble", and then as soon as they begin to respond I interrupt with "Close your mouth" and I walk away. This makes people realize they're overreacting and they calm down right away.