The funniest thing about the Cybertruck is the windshield wiper. Not only does it ruin the science fiction ascetic by breaking up the flat surfaces, it breaks up the primary surface with a dumb squeegee arm. It's also a little reminder that not only were the first wipers invented in 1903, but that they were fitted to electric vehicles.
I think they used one huge wiper in an attempt to make it look innovative by just by virtue of being unusual.
The problem isn't that we pet birds, it's that we eat them. Or more specifically we gather them in huge, unsanitary populations in close contact with humans as they are raised and slaughtered.
This reminds me of how people think AIDS spread from other primates through bestiality, when bushmeat was the correct answer. I guess it's easier to imagine bestiality than the consequences of carnism.
*not vegan, Just finding it harder and harder to dismiss them.
The ultra-orthodox have wanted this for a long time and it's one of the reasons Israel's government was trying to curtail the power of the judiciary. You may remember there were protests in Israel over last summer over this.
This isn't about Pacifism, but more about autonomy and seclusion. I don't think they mind exposing their youth to bombs and bullets as much as exposure to cosmopolitan ideals they get from mixing with Israel's more secular youth. It's similar to the impetus for religious parents to do home-schooling in the US.
several independent investigations were not able to substantiate the claims.
Tyson was investigated by National Geographic and Fox to protect the shows they were producing starring him. I suppose the Natural History Museum looked into it enough to decide not to fire their star celebrity academic.
So the investigations had massive conflicts of interest actually. And none of them had an interest in his actual guilt. An none of them were victim advocates.
The accusations against Tyson are credible and they've never been properly investigated.
This is highly misleading! You don't need an expensive ship or spend hours sinking into the ocean. So long as you charge up on the beach, you should be able to just drive to the wreak.
Aren't Nationalism and Socialism contradictory? I mean in one the people serve the State while in the other the State serves the people. Not as dumb as Anarcho Capitalism, but still silly.
The false Monk has ridiculous posture. Most new players will allow it's posture to heal so that they have to take a significant portion of it's health before the posture will break.
Run away to heal? It's posture is healed. Dodge it's attacks instead of deflect? it's posture is healed.
You have to be super aggressive and stand toe-to-toe the whole time before the false monk plays like a single phase of the true monk. Try confetti.
You know, it's that same right wing government's hasbara for the 70 years to confuse the difference between an Israeli, a Jew, and a Zionist so they could use antisemitism as a cudgel and the Shoah as a shield.
FINE: If I'm not allowed to criticize Israel without fixing antisemitism first, then Israel can't have any more weapons or cover in the UN until they solve race relations in the US.
REMEMBER: If you have to have sex with you boss for advancement, that doesn't make you a slut, that makes them a sex-offender.
"career advancement" is euphemism designed to switch the power dynamic.
Nobody has ever lost the plot more than a Star Wars fan arguing realism. It's like watching a Road Runner cartoon with Neil DeGrasse Tyson.
I cannot speak to macaroni pie directly, but you'd be surprised by how many things considered Southern are straight out of Africa for reasons that should be obvious.
anyone who doesn’t agree with you is the bad guy.
You seem a little defensive. Threatened even.
This is ironic because the argument concedes vegan ideology, it's just attacks them for not doing more. At this point the carnists are not really arguing, they're negotiating terms of surrender.
Most meat consumers already suspect vegans are right. We get aggravated because we'd rather ignore that question. And a vegan threatens to force the issue, even in our own mind. If you've ever wondered why vegans inspire automatic hostility, ridicule, and derision it's because they threaten a carnists identity as a good person just by existing.
Forget about the damn gun, this woman was a "food service" worker in a prison at 04:00. That's gotta be one of the shittiest jobs in the country. She didn't even work for Georgia, she worked for Aramark, a contractor.
Once again, Linux is late with a feature that Microsoft not only has had for years, but is famous for.
(good for grilled cheese too) when the cheese is melting, force some into the pan to sizzle and crisp up. You can even toss a handful of cheese directly into the pan. The idea is to get crispy cheese bits embedded into the tortilla and clinging to the edges.
Also serve with pickled onion.
Personnel is much more apples to apples. Comparing spending between two nations muddies the waters.
I assume you're commenting on US spending, but consider that other countries don't have to pay US wages and benefits to it's soldiers, contractors, and manufacturers. If we could buy our weapons from India, recruit our soldiers from China, and build ships in S.Korea our defense budget would be much smaller without having to ration a single fighterjet.
Did you know that we spend almost 4X as much on social programs than we do on the military today?
One of the most common mistakes is assuming that political opponents are ignorant. If only they had the right education; consumed the right media; or had the correct experience, they’d surely see things properly. The error is believing that we arrived at our values through reason. Values like hierarchy or equity are adopted by a complex process of disposition, emotion, and experience. Reason may be a component of this process, it may be a value unto itself, but it cannot support values.
Even simple moral claims like “it’s wrong to steal” cannot be supported by logic. Give it a try and you’ll come up with arguments like: “stealing is wrong because it harms the victim”. But you’ve not solved the problem, just pushed it back a step because now you have to defend the claim “it’s wrong to harm”. You cannot use observations about how the world is to calculate how it ought to be. Justifying moral claims with other moral claims dooms you to circular reasoning and infinite regression.
For those of you clever enough to argue deontology or utilitarianism, I’ll point out that these systems are ethical. Only concerned with how one should behave; helpless to prove something just or wicked. The moral principles of deontology and utilitarianism are assumed, not proven. Both systems will endorse ridiculous, intolerable, and outrageous actions in particular circumstances.
Objective morality probably doesn’t exist and has never been justified.