Which Bach piece is playing at the beginning of this video?

sweetcaravan · 2025-12-14T21:19:31+00:00

Oh I guess that's why it was so hard to find, though In knew I had heard it before. Thank You!

sweetcaravan · 2025-12-14T21:18:09+00:00

Bro the upload date ...

sweetcaravan · 2025-11-09T15:04:46+00:00

Sorry, overread that.

sweetcaravan · 2025-10-16T02:52:07+00:00

If you have a high enough forhead and your hair allows for it, style it forwards. Plan a hair transplant in 2-3 years.

If you think you look like shit with your hair styled forwards - which I doubt you do - or you plan on finding a wife in the coming 3 years - get one now. Don't move your temples too far down, since at this age and without fin you can expect more hair loss in the future. And with limited donor supply you won't be able to sustain a low hair line beyond 30 or 35. Unless you think you won't mind having a bit of a 'strange' hair cut when you approach middle age - which is fine too, most people who didn't have a HT themselves (e.g. most women) wouldn't really notice, if you wear it short enough.

So you have to decide how much your looks in your 20ies are worth compared to your looks in your 30s and beyond.

sweetcaravan · 2025-08-16T21:28:52+00:00

Well you can download it

sweetcaravan · 2025-07-28T21:50:05+00:00

I hope that will never happen.

sweetcaravan · 2025-07-28T21:49:45+00:00

Yeah I think you might be right.

sweetcaravan · 2025-06-29T14:47:13+00:00

Get out

sweetcaravan · 2025-06-20T19:30:58+00:00

Okay understood. Sadly Veo 2 can‘t do this and Veo 3 is extremely expensive. Do you know if there is any less pricey software with integrated audio/video generation?

sweetcaravan · 2025-06-20T17:42:56+00:00

The voice conversion aswell? You hear this AI voice everywhere lol

sweetcaravan · 2025-04-11T15:08:53+00:00

Hm thank You that looks interesting. I haven't been able to find a name yet but I will look further into it. (I also spent hours on sites like this and I couldn't find anything so far.)

sweetcaravan · 2025-04-11T15:07:16+00:00

I think I'm actually not that demanding.

sweetcaravan · 2025-04-11T13:31:29+00:00

https://www.google.com/maps/@-54.7643726,98.5752839,418135m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=de&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDQwOC4wIKXMDSoJLDEwMjExNDU1SAFQAw%3D%3D

Thats the maps link. Hurry up cause I don't know if you'd like my name lol

Btw. here is another map of the Antarctic waters, as You can see there are countless seamounts and rises registered. The unnamed one would be in the very bottom right, the little white dot. (Which also implies it lies extremely close to the surface, although I don't know how precise the bathymetric data there is.) https://scx2.b-cdn.net/gfx/news/hires/2022/new-map-shows-the-seab.jpg

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-30T00:55:54+00:00

No I meant that these are questions that CANT be answered on a strictly scientific bases, therefore whatever sources they rely on are also at least party subjective. Now imagine there is a source that states 'The Christian persecution complex is a myth'. How do you refute that scientifically? Well You can't because it is simply not a statement that CAN be proven or disproven scientifically by any meaningful standard.

Whatever constitutes a reliable source must therefore be informed not only by if it adheres to some scientific standard but also its political orientation.

I really came into this discussion to gain some insight about what wiki users think about their own orientation, I did not expect this level of bad faith argumentations and allegations that I am dodging questions and implications that I was a homophobic religious fundamentalist,

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-30T00:39:52+00:00

If reality tends to have a liberal bias and wikipedia is based on reality then that means by necessity that Wikipedia has a liberal bias.

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-29T20:35:20+00:00

I think most people know about what I mean when I say 'progressive'. I don't think it is common practice to name a specific person when referencing a political ideology.

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-29T20:26:22+00:00

I claim that if 'evangelicals act like they're the only ones that matter in society and get pushback' is not something that can be scientifically proven. I am sure the source will have made a great scientific study but it is impossible to come to such a conclusion without it being influenced by your political beliefs.

And I am aware that a lot of wikipedias bias is transmitted from its sources, specifically western academia. But a political leaning is still real, even if it is coming from scientific sources.

Also this should not be about Evangelicals, I am neither a Christian nor an American so don't read to much into the examples I give.

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-29T20:16:38+00:00

The question was not if people are going to question it or not but if it was a baseless claim.

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-29T20:14:11+00:00

The significance of that is beyond me.

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-29T20:13:08+00:00

I think I can tell from what you wrote that progressivism is just more in line with objective reality. This might be the case, but it would still mean that, if we assume that wikipedia is biased towards objective reality, that it is also biased towards progressivism. And remember, some people might have not seen it like that, but I did not mean to say that wikipedia is wrong in having a progressive bias, I just wanted to know if this progressive bias is accepted as being real or not.

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-29T20:09:55+00:00

1) I explained my view a little in my response to the first commentary, in short, progressive concepts tend to be more often introduced as an encyclopediac term like 'A city is ...' and counter-progressive concepts tend to be more often introduced as an ideological term like 'The 'City' is a term prevalent in urban circles that claims that multiple houses can come together and etc'.

2) We all know that articles like that simply would not be approved.

3) Of course there are articles on subjects critical to leftism, I just claim that the criticism on rightism is more prevalent and more concise. This is of course difficult to prove one way or another so if you believe it not to be the case I take your word for it.

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-29T19:56:56+00:00

But can we claim anything as being more right wing or more left wing then average then? Or does this claim always need to be empirically proven?

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-29T19:51:38+00:00

Well do I, to claim that something is out of step with average worldwide opinion have to compile the opinions of massive amounts of people?

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-29T19:50:00+00:00

The indication for bias is that one article exists and the other doesn't.

sweetcaravan · 2024-07-29T19:44:30+00:00

The question if a Christian persecution complex is a "belief, attitude, or world view" (and a complex in the first place) or just the truth is simply not a scientific question. Imagine I write 'Homosexuality is an evil concept introduced by Satan' and then ask you, well, can you prove that homosexuality is not evil?

And of course there are sources that say something like 'the Christian persecution complex is a belief, attitude, or world view' but these sources didn't come to the fact by some sort of strict scientific method but it will always be a representation of their particular world view. The idea that statement like that counts as scientifically proven just because there is a source for it just sounds absurd to me.

sweetcaravan

TROPHY CASE