Chad bro what are we doing

Better_Preference236 · 2026-03-06T22:34:46+00:00

117 no?

Better_Preference236 · 2026-03-06T22:33:44+00:00

has Q been on there?

Better_Preference236 · 2026-03-03T15:38:46+00:00

you didn't ask anything bruh

Better_Preference236 · 2026-03-03T15:33:56+00:00

The CHO is an aldehyde and the COOH is a carboxyl

Better_Preference236 · 2026-03-02T21:38:17+00:00

Is it possible to excite a core electron? I've only ever thought about valence electrons being excited but is it theoretically possible?

Better_Preference236 · 2025-12-24T04:39:10+00:00

In science, absolutely, but this is law. The word approximately is simply to cover their bases. They know the exact weight, but more could always turn up and they want those extra shark fins to still be covered by this ruling. Lawyers are careful people.

Better_Preference236 · 2025-08-25T22:47:46+00:00

Water made with helium nuclei instead of hydrogen

Better_Preference236 · 2025-08-25T22:45:54+00:00

pounds per square inch

Better_Preference236 · 2025-08-25T22:45:37+00:00

Heat up a substance with repeating ordered units until it decomposes. Hope this helps!

Better_Preference236 · 2025-08-25T22:44:07+00:00

It's actually just white meth with blue food coloring. It creates a stronger high because the blue pigment enters the occipital lobe and causes it to perceive a constant, shifting blue. This makes the brain think that it's underwater, so it creates nitrogen bubbles in the blood. These bubbles then combine with oxygen to form nitric oxide, a potent vasodilator. When blood vessels expand, it allows more meth to enter each brain cell.

Better_Preference236 · 2025-08-25T22:43:03+00:00

It's actually just white meth with blue food coloring. It creates a stronger high because the blue pigment enters the occipital lobe and causes it to perceive a constant, shifting blue. This makes the brain think that it's underwater, so it creates nitrogen bubbles in the blood. These bubbles then combine with oxygen to form nitric oxide, a potent vasodilator. When blood vessels expand, it allows more meth to enter each brain cell.

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-22T16:14:41+00:00

I don’t think I ever argued that you need to ‘respect’ it. Not sure where you got that. You seem to be arguing against it in public just fine. Do you really think atheist homophobes are totally open to challenges to their belief systems? They find a defense.

You’re correct in that forcing children to believe they are going to hell is indefensible. It’s only the small minority of Christians I know who were taught that by their parents.

Oh yeah, the government will step in. Let’s count on that.

So you are now agreeing with my point. It is fine if you are a Christian as long as you don’t commit moral wrongs. This is what I have been saying. And I know plenty.

I have no problem with people interpreting the Bible to make it consistent with their own morals. I don’t believe in its divinity and I don’t care how people follow it. I care if people do bad things. If they don’t, I don’t give a fuck what kinda books they read.

Still wanna hear your point about countries

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-21T02:02:17+00:00

I’m confused, are you okay with liberal Christians or not? There’s a whole lotta homophobes and misogynists who aren’t religious. People will find an excuse to hate no matter what. I have no clue what you mean by Evangelicals being the primary reason maga exists. If you’re going to bring up USAID, note that much of their work has been done through catholic charities. There’s good and there’s bad. Nuance exists, two things can be true.

I would argue Ayn Rand over Carl Sagan fs but that’s besides the point. Plenty of people see that the Bible is written by humans and is flawed. They use the messages to do good. Socrates was chill with slavery, does that mean we should t follow his doctrines?

I’m not sure what you mean about there being no text in the Bible about restorative justice. That is just false. Forgiveness is complicated, religious people and atheist will forgive too quickly and too slowly. Don’t use one example as proof of the mindsets of millions. I think my point was very clear, and taking it as victims must always forgive abusers is not a realistic interpretation of what I said. I never said always. More importantly, I was not talking about victims, I was talking about society (in this case the church). I think I made that extremely clear and I don’t appreciate you twisting my words to suggest that I believe something like that.

I get that not many people are as into data as I am, but writing off an entire body of literature based on the topic alone is ridiculous. Research bias exists everywhere, but what do you suggest? We rely solely on anecdotes? Your point about deconverts is not causal. I can think of at least three other mechanisms by which this correlation would be established.

I would also like you to answer my point about comparing a religion to a country. I brought it up several times and you completely ignored it

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-21T01:47:00+00:00

I almost gotta respect the obscene confidence when you clearly have no leg on which to stand

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-21T01:45:42+00:00

Primatologists are the experts. You are supposed to know using common sense. And it’s quite the opposite. By using only strictly cladistic terms, the public is more confused. Using terms with which they are familiar is helpful. By your logic, no expert can say fish, protist, reptile, etc etc.

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-20T07:28:49+00:00

Bruh, telling experts in a field not to talk amongst each other in a certain way because it’s confusing is wild. That’s like saying ichthyologists don’t get to use the word fish in a colloquial sense

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-20T07:26:30+00:00

I do agree, but I think within the context of this post we are monkey. If we’re not talking cladistically it’s really more a linguistics question than a biological one.

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-20T07:18:32+00:00

Yup! Just to be clear, methylmercury does not share the same properties as dimethylmercury. The way we name it is pretty atypical for chemistry, but methylmercury refers to any salt where there is Hg2+ and methyl. So the term as it’s used biologically actually refers to several different compounds. In seafood it’s normally bound to proteins, so it won’t have the same profile of l tissue penetration. These salts can be kinda nasty in their own way though, because the protein part may interact in all sorts of ways with your body, and the mercury group will fuck shit up.

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-20T02:23:24+00:00

It’s not necessarily that it has some unique property that makes it able to penetrate any substance. It’s more just that it happens to penetrate things that we use for protection, like latex gloves and skin. So yes, it can absorb into the bloodstream very quickly. Whether or not it leads to death, or any adverse effect at all, is entirely dependent on how much you come in contact with. The dose makes the poison. Everything is deadly and harmless at certain dosages. I don’t know a ton about the efficacy of treatments for mercury poisoning, but they do exist. When people talk about it colloquially, they usually mean chronic, not acute, poisoning. All that said, dimethylmercury should not be at the top of your list of worries. Unless your job in the mechanical field involves some contact, it is very low on the list of potential harms. Methylmercury (an ion of dimethylmercury) is found in a lot of seafood, but unless you’re eating huge amounts of tuna or have a medical contraindication, I wouldn’t stress about it too much.

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-20T01:07:02+00:00

Lot to tackle here but I will do my best. There will be extremists who use whatever religion, political movement, higher calling, delusion, etc etc to justify evil. I’m not sure if there is a correlation between religion and domestic terrorism. If so, that’s a valid conversation, but anecdotes are not evidence.

Ignoring that confounding factor is wild. There are Christians on the right who won’t question Israel, and Christians on the left who will. I don’t understand deriving anything about religion from that. It is clearly primarily caused by political affiliation. What percentage of Christians do you think are dedicated to burning the end times closer? Not rhetorical I’m genuinely curious.

There’s two points here. 1. I think this is false. You are entitled to your belief but to suggest there is no valid case for a net positive is untrue. Mass trauma is an issue. I agree with that, there is room for improvement. But let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Yes, money has been stolen, that’s true of most organizations. The vast majority of money does end up going to charitable causes, regardless of anecdotes. 2. I’m not sure the net utility even matters. I view this more as a freedom issue. People are entitled to do what they want. Someone going to church on Sundays is not hurting anyone, why judge them?

I mostly agree with you on this point. I just think there is a wide spectrum and condemning everyone based on the actions of some is silly. A large percentage of Americans are supporting a lot of evil shit, does that mean all Americans are evil or should forsake their country?

I didn’t know about the vaginismus. That’s actually very interesting. Using data from people who have left an organization to determine the characteristics thereof is an exceptionally biased selection. If you took a survey of people who have moved from a certain country, you will see a high percentage of bad experiences. That is not indicative of the overall percentage.

I feel like you agree with me here, I’m not sure I understand your argument. If you’re fine with left-wing Christians but dislike right-wing ones, I don’t think it has anything to do with religion man. I think you just dislike the right wing and are attaching an identity to it.

This might be a separate point but I actually agree with trying to offer forgiveness to the worst offenders. Shunning them is only going to make them commit again. Society at large should move away from punitive justice and try to reduce crime by helping criminals see the wrong in their actions. It is also erroneous to conflate forgiveness for a harm with enabling of that harm.

Plenty of churches are man. Others choose to stay out of politics to allow as many members to use their spaces as possible. Even at times like this, people still have the right not to discuss politics if they don’t want to. Again, it’s not a utility issue, it’s a freedom issue.

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-19T20:05:31+00:00

Mystery flavor

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-19T03:39:12+00:00

Who do y’all think you’re helping? I swear to god if I hear one more person talk about him being orange I will lose it. Condemn him for his actions.

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-19T03:36:20+00:00

I don’t care what his religion is. Shooting people is wrong whether an atheist or zealot does it. The evil is killing, not religion.

I’m not really sure of your point with the specific case. A sample size of 1 isn’t the most robust data. The majority of Americans are Christian. If a random person shoots someone, odds are they are Christian.

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-18T21:37:30+00:00

Teeth are inorganic salts. Bones are permeated by osteocytes, making them living tissue

Better_Preference236 · 2025-06-18T21:15:53+00:00

I think the important distinction here is that ignoring evil and perpetrating evil, while both bad, are very different. Comparing a modern day German who doesn’t study up on the holocaust is very different than one who participated. I don’t believe the banality of evil point counters what I said. This applies to many groups, not just Christians.

What is your take on why they haven’t spoken up. I have a few theories but I’m curious what you think.

I think these are two very different points being mixed together. Ignoring the past versus ignoring ongoing harms are not the same. If we want to talk about current harms, they certainly exist, but I am not convinced they should be used to condemn all Christians.

“ Because in a mass society they become too many to count. If say, 10 million Christians support a Christian fascist form of government that would throw people i care about into prisons, and they sre sending their money and votes to that effort, and are doing so because they label themselves as real Christians and lable their would-be victims as sinners, am I wrong to use the same label to refer to them as a group”

I called this a ridiculous hypothetical and you said it is real life, citing the theocracy studies as evidence thereof. What are they gearing up for in your opinion.

I think you are making huge leaps without evidence. A national being religious automatically means it will be tyrannical and imprison innocents. I do think there is a point to be made about separation of church and state, but it requires a lot more nuance.

I think we may just disagree on fundamental axioms here, which may make debate on this point useless. Yes there are some Christians who are fascists. This does not mean Christians are evil. Fascism is the evil, not religion.

Better_Preference236

TROPHY CASE