Victor

Well that’s pretty cool, at least. 👍

Lots of gay people on Tumblr? Or what’s the implication?

“gayarsonist” and “gaycaspian”. What are the odds.

Misanthropy involves a negative evaluative attitude toward humanity that is based on humankind’s flaws. Misanthropes hold that these flaws characterize all or at least the greater majority of human beings. They claim that there is no easy way to rectify them short of a complete transformation of the dominant way of life.

I thought this was quite interesting. I think I agree very much with

there is no easy way to rectify them short of a complete transformation of the dominant way of life

but not so much with

these flaws characterize all or at least the greater majority of human beings

I just think these flaws characterize all or the greater majority of human beings that possess a relative amount of power. That’s the real problem. Or perhaps the real problem is that power itself transforms humans and gives them these flaws. I’m not sure if it’s the chicken or the egg, kind of thing.

It seems tangential, perhaps? Like, accepting the fact that nature is going to kick our asses eventually anyway, is what you’re getting at? Let me know if that’s what you were thinking. 🙂

Holy hell. That was out of a clear blue sky.

Take care, bud. 🩵

Yep, that is indeed exactly what I was asking. 👍 The ideology that humans should be exterminated.

Is there a name for the ideology that humans should be wiped from the planet for the benefit of the planet and the rest of the organisms on it?

Haha yeah. Love that guy btw.

🙂‍↔️

Do your work for you, you say?

Or is this a hobby project?

Nothing causes the electron to emit a photon exactly then at exactly that energy, it’s just something that happens.

I have to say this doesn’t sound very scientific to me.

Science would settle at “it’s just something that happens”? Certainly not the scientist in me, lol. Everything that happens is driven by something, in my mind. Some process. Even if it “appears” probabilistic or whatever. Seems like a probabilistic model is applicable to the behavior, perhaps, but we can’t measure or see such small things so we can’t really make any more detailed models than that. Isn’t that right?

So just because we don’t yet have a model for it or understand it fully, but we can describe it with some model, doesn’t mean we are finished or should stop there, IMO.

It’s like saying the dinosaurs went extinct after the youngest bones we’ve found. Or that they are exactly as old as the oldest bones we’ve found. But, we haven’t found all the dinosaur bones, or at least we can’t know that we have or haven’t. And we definitely haven’t found the bones of those dinosaurs that didn’t leave behind bones.

You feel what I’m getting at, kind of?

I was referring to the difference between a theory and a hypothesis.

Theorem would also be interesting to add to the mix.

Could you explain the difference to me? 🙏

Just a joke. It’s just a way to set up the joke. It doesn’t make sense, practically, but it isn’t supposed to be part of the funny bit. Or it is… It could be, in an ironic way.

🤷‍♂️ Take it with a pinch of salt.

Deez nuts?

Or “a criteria”.

Mmh… Careful now…

That why Snoop was hanging around the skateboard street comp with his shitty little electric hand fan? (We have the same one.)

;}}}