iNow

Is there anything beyond confirmation bias suggesting women like bad boys? A definition for bad boy that is more precise than waffling and hand waving, perhaps?

Youth is wasted on the young

Another impressive bit of work on the creation and detailed 3D rendering of a 2D image, Janus. I can only imagine the hours that went into it, and appreciate you sharing it here in a lighthearted way.

Watching Elizabeth Warren debate Trump will be like watching a nuclear physicist explain gravity to a giant jar of spoiled mayonnaise. lol

Also, when typing a post, check your settings in the footer of the text editor box. Just below it. You may have manually disabled embedding in your own personal settings by mistake. Come to think of it, also check your personal settings more broadly. I think it’s somewhere around the personal profile. It seems like the system is actively preventing embedding and personal settings are a possible culprit worth checking.

Try taking off everything after and including the ampersand... the app= stuff and just use the normal link, not the embed / share syntax https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1TcnQxV4BE

Thanks for the quote. Perhaps you noticed that even your own source confirms that animals innovate too, hence the suggestion that the ability to innovate is the key difference between humans and other nonhuman animals is plainly false.

Not really. Animals innovate all of the time, too. They innovate new ways to escape predators. They innovate new ways to find, collect, and store food. They innovate new ways to seek shelter or create protection from weather elements. You're attempting to force a distinction where none exists. It happens at varying levels and magnitudes, but is hardly unique to humans. After nearly 10 pages of thread reminding you of this, the fact that you keep repeating false assumptions suggests you're either deeply ignorant or disappointingly obstinate. False dichotomy, perhaps?

Perhaps for the same reason you keep ignoring obvious facts like the better vantage point and increased vision upright standing offers, or the better access to auditory stimuli from farther distances standing upright provides, or any of the great many other things already and repeatedly shared with you across 8 (seriously, 8? Are you effing kidding me?) pages of this thread. I’d have closed it by now, probably 6 pages ago, but YMMV

It hasn't declined. The rate of growth has slowed, but population continues to grow. I know. Math is like hard and stuff, but this one is pretty simple.

You’re projecting

Nonsense

Not like what, exactly? Science is nothing but varying levels of confidence and uncertainty based on varying weights of evidence. It's always provisional at best.

Maybe. All depends on the definitions you’re choosing for those words in your sentence.

Even the most precise logic rooted in invalid premises still leads one to wrong conclusions. Logic is necessary, but not sufficient for correctness.

Good Omens was fun. Was glad they didn’t completely ruin the book. Was pretty stoked when I discovered there were a bunch of Jeopardy episodes on Netflix so watched them all. My wife and I are right now “trying on” Another Life with Katee Sackhoff from Battlestar right now. A bit slow and predictable with just a touch of forced drama, but overall a nice show thus far to end the evening after we get the kids to sleep.

My post equally doesn’t apply to fruit flies or cactus or most forms of life. While whimsical as a commentary on modern times and human politics, it’s really quite crap when applied to the overall thread topic and I’d like to retract it.

The purpose of life is to choose, and the choice itself is simple. Choose kindness or Choose blindness Your purpose is to choose.

Your logic is flawed. Saying time is required for change should not be conflated with "time drives evolution." Selection drives evolution, not time. Time is merely prerequisite.

Bananas execute purple. See? I can post meaningless word salad, too. Evolution as a process requires progress through time, otherwise lifeforms would remain static (no time = no change), but this is an otherwise completely useless statement that provides no insight or explanatory power.

Being more blunt than Zap above, this myth was debunked long ago. The technical term for what you just shared is “nonsensical bullshit.” Are you familiar with the concept of a coincidence? Yes, it feels synchronistic, I agree, but the technical term here is “confirmation bias.” Said another way, explain how you account for the millions of times you think of others and nothing whatsoever happens. You simply don’t remember those. They’re less salient. You ignore them completely in your analysis Perhaps the phenomenon you describe truly exists, but for now the intelligent position is to assume it does not. You’re making an extraordinary claim and simply failing to offer extraordinary evidence that appropriately scales in support of it. I’m interested in your idea and welcome the aforementioned extraordinary evidence to convince me it’s worth accepting as valid.

They’re jumping ship from Fox and have signed with Hulu for future seasons

I kinda wanna eat it

A man died and went to heaven. As he stood in front of St Peter at the pearly gates, he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him. He asked, “What are those clocks?” St Peter answered, “Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on earth has a Lie-Clock. Every time you lie, the hands on your clock will move.” “Oh,” said the man. “Whose clock is that?” “That’s Mother Theresa’s. The hands have never moved, indicating that she never told a lie.” “Incredible!” said the man. St Peter continued, pointed to another and said, “That’s Abraham Lincoln’s clock. The hands have moved twice, telling us that Abe told only two lies in his entire life.” “Where’s Trumps clock?” “His clock is in Jesus’ office. He’s using it as a ceiling fan.”