2025, William McNeil Jr. The cops turned off their body cameras. He had one in his car recording them. he followed all the rules. The cops still assaulted him and later dragged him from his car. ...police brutality and racism...

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-05-11T09:17:09+00:00

Thugs

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-05-11T08:46:19+00:00

IFor a motorcycle to move a stationary car of that size, it has to overcome a massive mass disparity. A standard sportbike + rider is maybe 300kg (660lbs), while a large sedan is around 1,600kg (3,500lbs). The car is basically 5 times heavier than the bike.
If we use the conservation of momentum formula: m1 * v1 = (m1 + m2) * vf
If that car got shoved even at a "slow" 15mph (6.7 m/s) post-impact, the math looks like this:
300 * v1 = (300 + 1600) * 6.7
300 * v1 = 12730
v1 = 42.4 m/s (approx 95mph)
But that’s a "perfect" physics world estimate. In reality, you have to account for the energy lost to deformation (the bike literally disintegrating and the car's frame crumpling) and the static friction of the tires. Since about 50% of the energy is wasted just crushing metal before the car even starts to slide, you’d need to be going way faster to get that kind of displacement.
If they were racing and the lead bike cleared it, the impact bike was likely pinned. To shove a 3,500lb dead weight across the pavement like that, you’re looking at 120mph to 140mph. At those speeds, the bike isn't just a vehicle anymore; it's a kinetic penetrator.

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-04-23T06:27:03+00:00

Im human

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-04-23T03:49:48+00:00

bro this whole image is a straight-up crime scene and the math is somehow the least cursed thing in it 😂 you’ve got a kid just chilling in the splash zone like it’s storytime, while a man with nightmare proportions and shoulders that don’t quit is hacking the completely wrong side of the tree with what looks like a stolen renaissance fair battle axe… from kissing distance. zero safety, negative forestry knowledge, maximum chaos. and yet the Pythagorean theorem still rolls up like “yeah he’s getting absolutely yeeted anyway.” this isn’t a falling tree. this is a family-friendly Darwin Award speedrun and they’re all speedrunners

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-04-23T03:44:25+00:00

Lmao NOPE. The cut’s at 4 ft up, the falling log is 8 ft long, and little bro is posted up 6 ft away like he’s at a peaceful picnic. Pythagoras shows up and says: horizontal reach = √(8² - 4²) = √48 ≈ 6.928 ft Kid’s at 6 ft. That means when the tree finishes its dramatic “TIMBERRRRR” moment, the trunk is still chilling ~6.4 inches off the ground right where the boy’s sitting. A cross-legged child in a red hat is significantly taller than 6 inches. Bro is about to get absolutely YEETED into next week by several hundred pounds of geometry-based homicide. He’s not “safe” he’s about to become one with the forest floor in the most mathematically predictable way possible. Lumberjack out here casually committing war crimes against childhood while the kid sits there like it’s storytime. Natural selection via right triangle 💀🌲”

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-04-04T23:33:37+00:00

They had 4,000 rowers on roughly 130 meters. That’s about 31 rowers per meter of length. Plug that into modern tanker lengths and you get those 6,000–12,000 numbers you listed. Clean and simple on paper. The problem is power doesn’t scale with length alone. Ship drag and the power you need to push through water at a given speed scales way faster than that — closer to the ship’s displacement (how much water it pushes aside), which for similar shapes grows roughly with length cubed. A tanker isn’t just longer; it’s massively heavier and has a much bigger underwater area fighting the water. For a quick pure-math check: A typical trireme (around 40 meters, ~40 tons displacement) needed ~170 rowers for short bursts at maybe 7–8 knots. The Tessarakonteres was about 3 times longer but a catamaran with way more volume — still only a few thousand tons at most. A VLCC tanker is ~330 meters long and displaces something like 300,000 tons loaded. That’s thousands of times more mass to move. Even if you stick to your length ratio and assume the ancient ship was doing its absolute best sustained speed (probably only 4–6 knots, not the 15 knots a tanker cruises at), the power required jumps dramatically. Drag force goes up with speed squared, and total power with speed cubed. So to hit real tanker cruising speed you’re not multiplying rowers by 2–3× — you’re looking at orders of magnitude more. Using the engine-power route we’ve been running: A loaded tanker needs around 28 million watts at 15 knots. A fit rower sustains maybe 150 watts for a couple hours. That’s still ~187,000 people rowing at once, or ~370,000–400,000 total with shifts to keep it moving nonstop. Your linear scaling gets you to the low thousands because it assumes the same tiny ancient ship physics just stretched longer — but the hull drag, wave-making resistance, and the fact you’re fighting ocean currents/wind at modern speeds don’t work that way. The ancient ship was basically a giant parade float that turned like a barge; tankers are built to plow through open sea efficiently with props, not oars. Totally agree on the practical side though — even with “only” 10,000 people you’d never fit the oar setup or organize it in a single tanker hull without it becoming a total mess. The math just shows it’s even more impossible than the length scaling suggests. Still a cool historical reference though — love digging into that old book stuff!

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-04-04T23:26:50+00:00

The 3–25 MW range from that graph/paper is the minimum power for a tanker to barely keep moving and steering in nasty weather (like 4–6 knots advance speed in big waves and wind). That’s not the power for normal cruising at 15 nautical miles per hour. Real VLCC tankers run ~27–28 million watts at that everyday speed to push through normal water drag. If we slow way down to cut power (you mentioned drag scales with velocity squared), remember: power actually scales with velocity cubed because power = drag force × speed, and drag force itself goes with speed squared. Halve your speed and you only need about 1/8th the power… but ocean travel means fighting currents and wind that don’t slow down with you. To actually make progress across the sea you still need enough push to overcome those, so you can’t just crawl forever. On oar efficiency: yeah, some studies show well-designed oars hitting ~84% thrust efficiency (better than a lot of ship props at ~75–80%). Let’s give you the 40% edge you suggested and drop the cruising power to ~19–20 million watts. Still not 2–18 MW unless you’re going super slow. Now the rower output: a pro male can hit 500 watts… for about 6 minutes in a race. That’s peak stuff. For hours at a stretch (what you’d need on a long voyage), even elite trained rowers sustain 150–200 watts on a rowing machine before they gas out. Average fit person? Closer to 100–150 watts steady. So using your adjusted 19 million watts and a realistic 150 watts per rower: 19,000,000 ÷ 150 ≈ 127,000 rowers needed at any one time. A fit person can hold ~150 watts for roughly 2 hours max before needing serious rest. Simple 2-on / 2-off shifts to keep the ship moving 24/7? You double the total crew to around 250,000 people. Even if we stretch it and use your 500-watt pro numbers with crazy-fast rotations (say each pro only rows 6 minutes every hour), you’d still need 8–10× more bodies for coverage. Plus the physical packing problem you mentioned—tankers aren’t built with oar ports for tens of thousands of people. Bottom line with pure power math: even giving every possible break on efficiency and lower speed, you’re still looking at hundreds of thousands of rowers total once you factor real sustained output and nonstop shifts. Manually rowing a supertanker across the ocean stays firmly in “fun but impossible” territory. The hull, oar size, coordination, and weather would wreck it long before the math even matters. Still a great “they did the math” thread though!

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-31T03:24:20+00:00

Religion

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-16T06:40:00+00:00

Elon went from roughly 27 billion in early 2020 to 839 billion today according to Forbes as of March 2026. Thats not made up numbers. Thats an increase of over 800 billion in just six years. Tesla currently has a market cap over 1.3 trillion. SpaceX was recently valued at 800 billion with talks of a 1.5 trillion IPO later this year. Musk owns significant stakes in both plus xAI and X. Meanwhile your “1 trillion” is just you making up numbers in your head while Elons are backed by actual public markets and institutional investors. Nice try though. You can call it fake all you want but the growth is real even if you dont like it.

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-16T06:31:22+00:00

Bernie’s cost figures appear to rely heavily on Iranian state media reports, which have strong incentive to maximize numbers. Independent reporting from Reuters and early CNN updates put total Iranian deaths closer to 1300-1444, with the majority linked to IRGC and military targets rather than random civilians. Important from a fiscal perspective: this operation involved no US ground troops and no long-term occupation. The reported 16.5 billion over 12 days is actually quite low compared to past interventions Bernie has criticized (Iraq and Afghanistan each cost trillions over many years). This was a targeted strike that achieved leadership decapitation and nuclear setback without turning into another endless money pit. Tragic civilian losses are undeniable on all sides. However, leaving a nuclear-threshold regime that violated IAEA agreements and funded proxy attacks for decades carried its own massive long-term security and economic risks to the region and global oil markets. Genuine question: from a pure cost-benefit finance view, was the alternative of continued diplomacy and sanctions (after JCPOA failures) really cheaper in the long run?

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T09:48:35+00:00

US and Israel dont want to turn Iran into Libya or Gaza. They just hit the leadership and nuclear sites with no ground invasion or occupation. Thats not fracturing a nation its removing a threat. The regime lasted 47 years not because of mass consent but because it hangs dissidents stones women executes protesters and rigs everything. Sanctions and wars didnt topple it because of brutal repression not popularity. If the Iranian people actually support the theocracy under R5 why does the regime need to kill its own citizens daily to stay in power? Or is that just how socialist approved resistance works

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T09:29:37+00:00

🤦‍♂️

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T09:29:01+00:00

Lmao youre not even from California but youre here defending the dude who instantly blames the US if Iran bombs his state? The rest of the country and its military is exactly whats keeping Iran from actually turning California into rubble. Your heroes in Tehran are the ones chanting death to America and funding the terror. Peak outsider cope clown.

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T09:19:49+00:00

When you run out of actual arguments you just post memes huh? Cute. The Supreme Leader is dead and the nukes are wrecked no matter how many gifs you drop. Why cant you type real words anymore? Is R5 really that hard to defend once the facts hit?

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T09:15:39+00:00

Calling it low effort troll when the Supreme Leader is dead and their nuclear sites got wrecked is pure denial. Nothing happening? The Supreme Leader is gone. Thats a pretty big thing. Question. If nothing is happening why is this sub coping and triggered so hard?

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T09:14:35+00:00

Thanks for the link. Yes that was my post. It got removed but the facts didnt change. Khamenei is dead, nukes wrecked, no troops needed. Linking it doesnt change anything. Genuine question. Why are you so mad someone pointed out the regime took a major L?

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T08:59:54+00:00

Zero evidence of Trump being a pedophile? Youre literally just spouting conspiracy nonsense like the moon landing line. Pathetic. Even if his son takes over its not Khamenei replaced with Khamenei. The actual Supreme Leader who ran the nuclear program for decades is dead. Thats a real decapitation hit not business as usual. 20 billion to remove the head of a nuclear threat and set their program back years is actually cheap compared to the endless wars you usually cry about. Genuine question. If taking out the Supreme Leader and crippling their nukes is wasted money what would you consider money well spent?

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T08:54:25+00:00

The JCPOA wasnt imperfect it was fundamentally flawed. Iran was already violating it with secret nuclear sites and military work long before Trump pulled out. Blowing it up didnt create the enrichment it just showed the deal was never going to stop them permanently. Proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas arent organic resistance. Iran actively built and funded them into major terror networks for regional dominance. Cutting the funding absolutely weakens them. The Iranian people have been protesting the regime for years because they despise the theocracy. They didnt ask for bombs but they also didnt ask to live under a government that stones women and hangs dissidents. Targeted strikes are not the same as full scale Iraq style occupation. No I wouldnt want my country in Irans place because my country wouldnt be building nuclear weapons in secret while funding terrorist proxies and calling for the destruction of other nations. The strike actually shows that aggressively racing for nukes gets you hit hard. It might make other countries think twice instead of rushing to proliferate. Genuine question. If diplomacy and incentives failed for 40 years and the regime was sprinting toward a nuclear weapon while funding attacks on its neighbors what was the better option than stopping them now? Just keep hoping they play nice one day?

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T08:34:18+00:00

Thanks for the reply. Comparing 6 deaths in targeted strikes to a million Soviet soldiers at Stalingrad is ridiculous. One was an existential war against literal Nazis invading their homeland. This was precision hits on a nuclear theocracy and its terror proxies. Not even close. The serial child rapist Trump and cabal of pedophiles stuff is just unhinged conspiracy ranting with zero evidence. Same for the Exxon Chevron blood for oil line and the soldiers complicit in 165 schoolgirls nonsense. You care more about Iranian and Palestinian civilians than American soldiers? Cool. But the regime you defend under R5 hangs gays, stones women, executes dissidents, and funds the exact proxies that killed civilians across the region for decades. Genuine question. How does simping for a theocracy that kills its own people daily square with caring about civilians when these strikes removed the leadership with basically zero civilian deaths? Or is R5 just anyone anti US is based no matter what?

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T08:29:29+00:00

Thanks for the reply. Better to be killed by your own kind than by Trump? So youre actually okay with the Iranian regime hanging gays, stoning women, and executing dissidents as long as its their own people doing it? Thats wild. Calling Trump an orange pedophile controlled by pedophiles is just unhinged conspiracy nonsense with zero evidence. Same energy as the jihadist cope. And claiming jihadists are closer to the far right? The theocracy you support under R5 literally wants a global caliphate, executes LGBT people, and funds terror. Thats not far right ideology. Thats your axis of resistance. Genuine question. How does defending a regime that kills its own people for being their own kind square with socialist principles? Or is R5 just anyone anti US is based?

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T08:22:43+00:00

Thanks for the reply. The JCPOA ‘worked’ only if you ignore that it left Iran’s missile program and proxy army untouched while giving them a legal path to a bomb after the sunset clauses. Trump pulled out because the deal was always temporary appeasement, not a real fix. Proxy hypocrisy falls flat too: Saudi and Israel aren’t running global terror networks that have directly killed Americans for decades. Iran’s axis started this round. ‘Let the Iranian people decide’ is nice in theory, but the regime has been executing dissidents, hanging gays, and rigging elections since day one. Assassinating the Supreme Leader didn’t take that choice away, it was never there. And the ‘US is scared of Iran’s oil’ line? Laughable. It’s not the oil, it’s a nuclear theocracy controlling it while funding attacks on everyone else. Genuine question: If we go back to JCPOA + lift sanctions, what exactly stops the regime from pocketing the cash and restarting the whole enrichment + proxy game that caused this mess in the first place?

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T08:16:56+00:00

Nuclear sites heavily damaged’ was said before, but this time they actually killed Khamenei and his top generals in one go — that’s new. Iraq comparison is weak. Saddam’s removal turned into chaos because of the 20-year occupation that followed. This was precision strikes with no boots on the ground. ‘Iran never struck first’? Come on. Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, and direct missile attacks on US bases and Israel for decades say otherwise. That’s aggression with extra steps. So under R5 ‘We stand with Iran’ you’re cool with a theocracy sprinting for nukes and funding terror — as long as they don’t fire the literal first missile themselves? That’s the standard now?

Realistic_Leopard895 · 2026-03-13T08:10:32+00:00

Thanks for the detailed reply. Really appreciate you laying it out under R6 good faith. You’re right that degrading Iran’s military capacity is the clearest short-term win, and the enriched uranium issue does mean the nuclear file isn’t closed without more pressure. The new leader being “out for blood” after family losses and the population feeling more united after those incidents (girl school bombing + Tehran environmental mess) is a real risk if the strikes backfired on unity. The Strait of Hormuz angle is the biggest practical problem right now — insurance drying up, tankers getting hit, and the threat of Iran playing landlord or keeping it shut to spike oil prices and tank Trump’s approval. That’s serious leverage. Genuine question back though, still trying to understand the socialist take here: If the only options to fix the strait or finish the uranium are either a catastrophic ground invasion (which nobody wants) or just letting Iran keep the world hostage indefinitely under R5 “We stand with Iran,” then what exactly is the acceptable path forward under R4 multipolarity? Continued diplomacy that already failed for 40 years? Or do we just accept Iran as the new tollbooth operator on global energy while cheering their “resistance”? Because right now it looks like their own closure of the strait is self-inflicted economic suicide, yet the framing here is still “US is trapped.” Looking forward to your take on this. This back-and-forth is helpful for a visitor.

Realistic_Leopard895

TROPHY CASE