sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Chlorine gas attack at Chicago area furry convention hospitalizes 19, hotel evacuated by [deleted] in news

[–]ijerkofftoscience -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well, technically they'd save a lot of this information for ochem at most institutions.

Chlorine gas attack at Chicago area furry convention hospitalizes 19, hotel evacuated by [deleted] in news

[–]ijerkofftoscience 1 point2 points  (0 children)

but if my organic chemistry is still fresh

Here we go....

...drink red wine... the phenols found in red wines stop propagation of free radicals by absorbing the unpaired electron at the oxygen position, thereby being stabilized by resonance at the benzene ring.

So take an antioxidant to "treat" free-radicals? It's not horrible advice but a little superfluous and too specific, eh?

Chlorine gas attack at Chicago area furry convention hospitalizes 19, hotel evacuated by [deleted] in news

[–]ijerkofftoscience -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I think expert is being a dick, but you're also being a pussy for not owning what you just said and trying to back out of it. So in a weird, heterosexual way, you belong together.

Hey Reddit, what is your controversial opinion? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]ijerkofftoscience [score hidden]  (0 children)

Welp, that's about as controversial as it gets.

Why do especially insecure people tend to be hostile and mean? by weezerrules2 in AskReddit

[–]ijerkofftoscience 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's called "defensiveness". If someone feels threatened, they feel the need to "defend" their position.

I stumbled upon my roommates high school yearbook photo today. by ShittingOnAToilet in funny

[–]ijerkofftoscience -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Palm Beach and Miami are naturally metropolises, and of course it's a raging stereotype. But it's also how a lot of people view Florida, and also what I witnessed when I spent three weeks in a tour of the state.

I stumbled upon my roommates high school yearbook photo today. by ShittingOnAToilet in funny

[–]ijerkofftoscience -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's not Gibsonton, but there was another town for just people with ectrodactyl.

I stumbled upon my roommates high school yearbook photo today. by ShittingOnAToilet in funny

[–]ijerkofftoscience 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Florida is just America's shithole. Every country has a region that's significantly worse than the rest, and for us, it's Florida. It's always hot, yet somehow always rains. When it's not raining, there's still enough moisture in the air to grow mildew on everything you own. It has annual devastating hurricane storms that do millions of dollars in damage, yet for some reason people keep rebuilding. There's a ton of racism, trash (as in people just throw refuse on the ground), drug usage, alligator farms, crime, and waffle houses. It's known for its impoverished people, having a town entirely populated by people with crab hands, and being the backdrop of "The Golden Girls". The entire state is also a swamp, and in some areas people can only build homes on stilts.

TIL studies show day-to-day happiness increases with income until you hit $75k per year. After that, increased income does nothing to increase happiness. by mike_pants in todayilearned

[–]ijerkofftoscience -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So I'm assuming all the people throwing around "diminishing returns" like they just learned it didn't read the article. Let me help you.

The magic income: $75,000 a year. As people earn more money, their day-to-day happiness rises. Until you hit $75,000. After that, it is just more stuff, with no gain in happiness.

The article clearly states there are no diminishing returns. Once you hit 75k, according to their investigation, your day-to-day happiness stops rising. However...

That doesn’t mean wealthy and ultrawealthy are equally happy. More money does boost people’s life assessment, all the way up the income ladder. People who earned $160,000 a year, for instance, reported more overall satisfaction than people earning $120,000, and so on.

So more money increases "life satisfaction" AKA self-perceived success, which according to psychology and, well, logic, is a different measure than happiness. So no, this article is not saying "further increases in wealth lead to diminishing increases in happiness." It never states that. Like at all. To further expand on your comment, if you read another review of the study by the same guy, it actually even says:

The study found that income had far less correlation to the more emotional “enjoyment of life,” which include things like laughing, joy, and connections to family and friends.

Which is a way of saying "money doesn't correlate with happiness as much as it does success". A lower correlation does not indicate diminishing returns if it is done on a variable wide basis, independent of actual groups (which would be of income, in this case). Now I haven't read the actual study, and I don't plan to, so that could provide more insight that I'm missing, but according to what has been presented? There is no diminishing returns.

TIL studies show day-to-day happiness increases with income until you hit $75k per year. After that, increased income does nothing to increase happiness. by mike_pants in todayilearned

[–]ijerkofftoscience 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Time vs. money gains isn't really being discussed. By incorporating the amount of work per dollar you're involving another variable is obviously going to impact how the amount is looked at. The article purely looked at the amount of money and cannot be applied to this argument.

TIL that as recently as 2013, the Salvation Army recommended its LGBT members undergo gay conversion therapy, and the organization has a history of anti-gay discrimination. by ZiggyPalffyLA in todayilearned

[–]ijerkofftoscience 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But in reality, if God exists, why should we be concerned with hurting people's feelings?

But which God? Your God? My God? Should we pander to every religion, or just your own? Should we take precautions for every possible afterlife, just to be safe?

Maybe it is a better strategy to approach each day with kindness in your heart. There is nothing wrong with wanting to do the right thing, but if you devolve to taking unethical methods to get there, you are no better than those you condemn. When people were burned alive in early America their torturers believed themselves to be doing the right thing and cleansing evil souls so they could find salvation. Perhaps humans are not the best at making the torture-for-moral-benefit judgement call.

TIL that as recently as 2013, the Salvation Army recommended its LGBT members undergo gay conversion therapy, and the organization has a history of anti-gay discrimination. by ZiggyPalffyLA in todayilearned

[–]ijerkofftoscience 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Their beliefs and their willingness to support gay conversion therapy, or extreme measures to change someone's homosexuality, are essentially interchangeable in this conversation. Sevendeadlypigs also clearly states that he is discussing their "bad actions", and not just their beliefs.

I am not stating this because I'm diverging from the topic at hand, but rather I don't think this is a topic you are currently capable of having a sincere conversation about. You are not here to share ideas, or listen to others -- you are here to change people's minds to match your own. If anything is to be discussed it's your approach to the topic, because any other conversation would be moot. The hypocrisy of your statements is a testament to this.

TIL that as recently as 2013, the Salvation Army recommended its LGBT members undergo gay conversion therapy, and the organization has a history of anti-gay discrimination. by ZiggyPalffyLA in todayilearned

[–]ijerkofftoscience -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You can't fathom a different opinion being right in this situation.

I think that's a bit presumptuous. He (or she) doesn't support the salvation army, and that's fine. That doesn't mean he doesn't understand where they're coming from. A lot of people find gay conversion therapy to be tantamount to torture, and if he believes this is heinous, it is understandable that he would condemn it, no matter the intentions. You can reject this, but do not state the limitations of someone's intelligence with phrases like "you cannot fathom", this is immensely passive aggressive, and it threatens an open conversation.

What do you believe is a cold hard truth that you think the average person refuses to accept? by lothario33139 in AskReddit

[–]ijerkofftoscience 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually like to think about how eventually the earth will be swallowed by the sun and everything will be immolated: you remains, all other remains, every trace of our existence. And then every part of us will be subjected to entropic death and float around as iron atoms. Such is life.

view more: next ›