That's pretty stinking cool.

I love the documentary style view of just a day in the life of the dinosaurs.

During the pandemic I've taken my family to a few drive-thru events, one of them being a thing where they have dinosaurs built to scale. The thing the struck my wife and me is how small they actually were.

Don't get me wrong; they were big, but just not as big as they probably are in your imagination.

The only one that was like holy cow was a flying dinosaur whose height was like 30 feet. That was this guy, named Quetzalcoatlus:

Your video, 80’s-styled Car Collisions- Scaled Edition, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Jesus fuck, @bobknight33….you can’t be this gullible. Some internet failure of a traveler blogger did not discover some massive nefarious Chinese plot to develop targeted diseases to release publicly against their genetic enemies….nor did he fact check it any more than you did. If there was a scintilla of truth to this nonsense, he would have been disappeared long before he could post this fantasy through the well monitored Chinese internet or leave the country. Duh. How do you fall for this…every….single….time?

I love how these idiotic conspiracy theories require unbelievable competence, cooperation on a scale never seen, planning and execution on a god level, but idiot internet sleuths think they, on their own, have unraveled the conspiracy because the god level conspirators made some idiotic rookie mistake no professional ever would, exposing the entire scheme….but only to them, the proof is hidden, just trust them.

Jesus fucking Christ, grow up and join reality, buddy. You honestly need mental help if you believe the nonsense you post.

Nonsense. Pre industrial agriculture wasn’t very damaging in most cases…and when it was it was on a minuscule scale compared to industrial agriculture.
Pre industrial building wasn’t excessively environmentally damaging in most cases, certainly not to the point where it endangered the planet or it’s atmosphere.

It's utterly ridiculous hyperbole to say we have to be cavemen to not destroy our environment. We don't even have to revert to pre industrial methods, we just have to be responsible with our actions and lower the population massively. With minor exceptions, pre industrial farming caused little to no permanent damage, and it was almost all easily repairable damage. (With a few exceptions like Rapa Nui that may not have been over farming but cultural damage, we aren't exactly certain what happened there).

I eat berries now, don't you? I grow raspberries, blackberries, black raspberries, blueberries, strawberries, and Tay berries myself. People would be healthier if they ate berries, and they're tasty too. What?!

Yes, around 7 billion need to die (without procreating first). Better than all 9 billion.

There’s a huge difference between being occasionally deadly and so insanely toxic we destroy our own planet in under 200 years to the point where our own existence is seriously threatened.
Edit: toxicity levels matter as much as exposure levels. Cavemen impacted their environment at levels well below sustainability (mostly….the idea they killed the mammoths or mastodons off by hunting is, I believe, a myth….natural environmental changes seem much more likely to be the major influence in their extinction.). Per capita, modern humans have a much larger, more detrimental footprint than premodern humans, exponentially larger….and there’s like a hundred thousand times as many of us (or more) too. We need to reverse both those trends drastically if we are to survive long term.

Yes, progress includes risk, but risk can be managed, minimized, and not taken when it’s a risk of total destruction. We totally ignore risk if there’s profit involved.

This is a night time comedy show, not a science class. I think you expect WAY too much. It points out that there is a problem, it doesn’t have the time, or the audience to delve into the intricate chemical processes involved in the manufacture, use, and disposal of them. It touched on them, and more importantly pointed out how they’ve been flushed into the environment Willy nilly by almost everyone who manufacturers with them.

Made me wonder, how many steps (geographically/ scale) can be made starting with the universe and ending at a residential address?

(edit)
Universe
Super Cluster
Cluster
Local Group
Solar System
Planet
Continent
Country
State
County
City
Neighborhood
address
(may not apply to everywhere i'd assume)

That's my best stab at it. Do tell if it's not correct in some way.

Your video, The Incomprehensible Scale of 52!, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I would love to have a sense of scale... How high are these 'cliffs'? Knee high?

Of course on a comet, gravity would be so light you easily might be able to bound from bottom to top even if they're as high as the Grand Canyon. You might even jump off altogether.

The end of the war and resumption of the Third Indochina War would precipitate the Vietnamese boat people and the larger Indochina refugee crisis, which saw millions of refugees leave Indochina (mainly southern Vietnam), an estimated 250,000 of whom perished at sea.
The war exacted an enormous human cost: estimates of the number of Vietnamese soldiers and civilians killed range from 966,000 to 3 million. Some 275,000–310,000 Cambodians, 20,000–62,000 Laotians, and 58,220 U.S. service members also died in the conflict, and a further 1,626 remain missing in action. -wiki

So, millions fleeing as refugees, hundreds of thousands died in their attempts to escape, tens of thousands of allies killed by the VC, far more weapons, vehicles, and equipment left abandoned (and less of it decommissioned) to the enemy and a similar abandonment of the government we had been supporting. The scale of Vietnam was exponentially larger, so were the losses when we retreated. How is Kabul worse than that?

Please explain in detail how Kabul is worse. My guess....you've got nothing.

believe the idea is that all of us do or don't engage in things that we don't necessarily enjoy (or enjoy). either for legality or decency or the stir, it causes...

- breastfeeding
- pistol wearing in town
- hats at weddings/funerals/churches
- shutting off cells at the same and more
- wheels on busy sidewalks
- not heckling the priest's sermon ("YOU SUCK FATHER!")*

some of these are up to the person, some not as bad as others, but common sense SHOULD guide sane people.

'tho if COVID becomes a public health crisis (ala Black Death-esque) they'll find where their freedom meets real oppression (Thyphoid Mary on a large scale).

https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2020/youraba-april-2020/law-guides-legal-approach-to-pandemic/

personally, the idea that I could end up killing someone quickly replaced my health concerns. if found someone died because wasn't wearing a mask - would kill me.

so, in short, hope any/or all of these blunts find themselves in a situation where their car won't start. and no one will help them 'til them mask up.

"just need a part!"
"not until you observe our policy of public health! here's a mask...and if you'd put on shoes and a shirt..."

bet they'd do it for their f'n car. but for little bobby or old man Thorney?

...hope a camel w/a huge lip blister kisses them straight on the mouth.

reminds me of a song...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFRDimvVimw

testify.



* Bobcat gag

Most republicans CLAIM they believe multiple ineligible voters voted and had their votes counted despite ALL evidence to the contrary and not a single case of non citizen Democratic voting nor a single case of Democrats voting twice, but many from Republicans including one guy who murdered his wife to use her vote to vote for Trump and a judge who cast his dead wife's ballot, then there's the multiple Republican candidates who collected ballots from the elderly and filled them out, casting votes for themselves by the thousands, and the fake ballot boxes set up by Republicans that continued after secretaries of state demanded be removed because they are specifically prohibited by law (and that allowed Republicans to sift through votes and discard Democratic ballots). Republicans do not care about securing non Republican votes anymore, Trump removed the last vestige of that patriotic civic feature from your group. Today's Republicans want to discard over half the legal votes for no reason besides they aren't for their candidate, liar.

Remember when Trump admitted that if every citizen voted, no Republican would ever be elected again? That's an admission they can only win by cheating straight from the cheater in chief's mouth....an admission that legal voters don't vote Republican, only by denying millions their constitutional rights AND cheating AND gerrymandering can Republicans win at all....Trump said it.

Let's have 5 cases of actual, prosecuted Democratic vote fraud cases from the last three elections, I can show you hundreds of times more than that from Republicans....thousands more. Liar. I know for certain you couldn't come up with two if I gave you one as a freebie.

There are no Democratic fucker laws, but hundreds of Republican fucker laws that discourage and block legal votes from poor and black areas and people, you claim it's to secure the vote against frauds while you have zero evidence any ever existed in the populations these laws target, blocking and denying millions of votes to fight a crime that doesn't exist except in Republican circles and Republican delusions. You believe they're all Democrat votes, so you don't care if they're legal voters being disenfranchised, liar.

Denying a legal vote has exactly the same effect as allowing an illegal one....which party wants to deny legal votes, Bob? Hint, it's the same party caught thousands of times recently casting illegal and/or tampered with votes AND discarding thousands of votes for Democrats. Liar.

Provide ID for free in the communities you insist must have them, not only available at the DMV 25+ miles away with no bus service going there, then and only then would it be even partially proper to enact laws to require them, or require a free voter ID that every citizen has the same access to and the same difficulties getting, so no online application, no phone application, stand in line at a DMV at least one county removed from your address. Republicans blocked a national voter ID, because it's not about ID, it's about denying legal voters in Democratic populations.

All illegal votes were Republican illegal vote frauds for Trump, every single one found. If illegal voting was a real concern, voting laws would target Republicans, not Democrats. They absolutely don't, and recordings of Republican leaders prove it was never about illegal votes and always about suppressing Democrat voters. Liar.

The true question is how are Republicans getting away with election interference at a massive scale, rigging elections nation wide while dishonestly claiming they're "securing the vote" but really they're securing it in Republican gerrymandered districts for Republicans, not ensuring every legal vote counts but instead denying any vote they question....which are only Democratic votes despite the long history of Republican frauds, rigging the system so they're "winning" elections with 10% fewer votes than their opponents, and threatening murders and civil war when y'all lose. Crybaby liar.

Republicans absolutely don't want an honest vote system in place because republicans cannot win honest, fair elections. Democrats tried dozens of times to pass laws securing elections, creating physical records of every vote, securing machines against tampering, even creating a (free) national voter ID, etc...Republicans obstructed every one without considering them at all because not allowing democrats a victory is far more important to y'all than securing elections or making them fair or honest.

You are projecting.

Marriage takes the honesty away from a relationship.
It's no longer me and you.
It's me and you and uncle sam.
I want *consensual* relations where me and my partner set our rules, not some 3rd party, and not when the rules are stacked against me.

Congratulations to your brother. Lucky him.

I never said women don't work.

I said that men make more personal sacrifices for their work - a true statement about men as a group. Exceptions don't alter the rule.

Yes, women under 35 out earn men now. And as legacy earners retire, we will be facing a situation where women out earn men at any age. Preferential admittance and hiring tend to have that effect. It's by design.

And women don't get paid less for the same work - the studies saying that don't account for hours worked and don't provide any breakdown of job title. E.g. Women doctors get paid less - because the type of doctor they choose to be is more likely to be a pediatrician than a heart surgeon or anesthesiologist. But within each category of doctor, per hour worked, and per year experience, their income is essentially identical.

And you don't need to be a home maker to get paid in a divorce. Just make less than your partner.
Historically the divorce rewards scale higher for women given mirror situations.

Why would I want to deal with a 50/50 split when I brought 90% of the assets into the marriage? A 50/50 split would set me back decades. I just want to keep my stuff, I did pay for it after all, which cost me money, which cost me time, which cost me life.

And why should /anyone/ have their life supported by anyone else?
(*context=spouses. Not interested in some bad faith out of context argument bringing up children or retirees supported by taxes, etc)
Are you able bodied? Then get working.
Is it tough? Too bad.
It's harder for both people supporting themselves alone, you aren't special. You were in this situation before you got married, you can go back to it.

In any case, the homemaker job argument is senseless. There are benefits (time with kids), and there are pitfalls (hole in your resume). You make your choice, and you deal with the consequences.
You are paid by the home over your head and the money you're given while you are a home maker. What other job do you get to leave and still be paid. People act as if the working partner was just chilling this whole time. Where are the working partner's continuing post divorce benefits?


I have no mindset about women. More projection.
I couldn't care less if I marry a stripper with 2 kids - so long as in the event of a divorce we go our separate ways with ZERO obligations to one another.

I have a mindset about the dangers of divorce, and the fact that most marriages end in divorce, and most divorces are initiated by the female partner.
I am on average more likely than not to face a divorce.
Hence the risk reduction by being more 'picky'.


I am in a nearly 20 year happy relationship - unmarried.
She's the boss of the relationship. And I'm fine with that because I *consent* to it. I can always walk away if I decide otherwise.

So long as laws and family court are how they are, I won't even consider marriage.

-scheherazade

For this to be relevant to me, they need to scale it back to
$500, $100, and tree fiddy.

Bob, as much as this'll surprise you, I totally agree with what you're saying. The distribution of the stimulus money to couples making up to $150,000 is friggen ridiculous -- and I'm in that category. I will do what I did with the last two checks: give to local charities helping the homeless and communities of color (as much as I hate that term).

The worst part of this is that it sets up a liquidity trap. The Fed can't reduce buying crap debt (that BBB dogshit is at 4% should terrify anyone who understands how debt and the rating agencies work), nor can they allow rates to rise (thus totally screwing responsible savers). This is the cusp of a financial disaster that blew past 1929 on 9/17/19 and is now approaching the cataclysm of the South Seas Company collapsing. As far as I can see, this is a total melt-up in the markets because there's no stable returns and everyone is now in speculation mode.

Were it my call, I would scale the money along income (or non-income) lines: $10k for the lowest incomes, sliding scale from there. I'd also set up government-backed savings accounts that pay 10% for those people and only those people. I'd also pay off/down student debt along the same income scales.

I do not begrudge the wealthy for their wealth. But capitalism can't be a winner-take-all system. We live in a society, and society will always have winners and losers. The least we can do is ease the burden for those at the bottom by taking some from the top. I'm tired of the homeless camps and mentally-ill people wandering the streets of Seattle. They are the least of us and thus should be the ones who get the most help.

It's fairly amazing how short the Stelliferous Era (the time period in which stars exist) is during the entire birth-to-death of the universe. It's roughly 10^6 - 10^14 years (one million to 100 trillion years from the Big Bang to stellar death, or a span of one million million x 8 years). This seems like a very long time, but on the universal time scale, it's not. "Matter" in the universe will exist for ~10^~125 years, or ten unquadragintillion (yes, that's a real word)

This is the equivalent (if I'm doing the math right) of the total life of the universe being a length of one mile, the entire age in which stars exist is the width of a playing card approximately one millimeter from the start.

For comparison, the atomic decay of Xenon-124 into Tellurium-124 is about 18 sextillion years (1.8 x 10^22 years), roughly 1 trillion times the current age of the universe.

The left subverted the election and admitted it in the article.

They colluded with the media, big tech, local and state governments with the sole purpose to sway voters and block opposition on a national scale.

I can read but can you take you blinders off?