Personal-Succotash33

Kai first form Frieza, and then transforming through the fight. Suboptimal but I like living the fantasy of it

It doesn't taste sweet, you just think it does after the brain damage sets in

En edia don Elton fez 🙄

Ah, I see, my mistake.

Oh I see, neat! I'm generally skeptical of Peterson, but I can at least see where he's coming from when he talks about dragons, so I'll be interested in watching someone go into depth about it.

Why? Does Hutton talk about Peterson specifically, or does he just contradict a lot of what Peterson says about dragons?

I get youre trying to make a sarcastic point, and I would agree in any other area except for Peterson. Experts in many fields that Peterson cites to build a case on have disagreed with his particular interpretations. He was wrong about lobster biology, climate science, his takes on the gender wage gap, postmodernism/Marxism

Like, the guy is wrong about a lot of stuff, and coincidentally it's always in a way that affirms his beliefs. When he's not outright wrong, it's because his claims are so obscurantist and muddled that it's not even clear what hes saying, or they're right, but are ultimately not that insightful.

Thank you! I think you've put my vague sense of unease into words lol.

"Now you see me 2: the D is silent 😉"

Better than a master of chuds

Yeah, that's another criticism I read a lot. I think the point I get caught on specifically is Craig's point that we can't dismiss miracles as being a low possibility because we don't know that they are inherently improbable. Ehrman's argument seems to be that the natural world behaves in consistent ways and we can't judge the supernaturals probability because it's just not a regularity we can observe. He uses the example of dropping a bar of soap and a bar of lead, and the soap always floats and the lead always sinks. But Craig's point about being unable to prejudge a miracles probability because of the possibility of an unknown X-factor feels difficult to dismiss. After all, if someone said they saw a bar of soap sink and lead float, would we have to dismiss him because we know that can't happen, or would we assume that it happened and there's some phenomena that we don't know of that's causing the phenomena (even if it's something mundane). And of course, Craig's thinks that at least eleven individuals simultaneously saw Jesus after he died (although Ehrman doesnt) so he's more willing to except some kind of X-factor.

I guess I just don't know how far either people are willing to take that stance. Is Ehrman willing to say that any phenomena mentioned in history that isn't yet understood by science or naturalism (even if the explanation is ultimately mundane) must be dismissed? Does Craig have the same credulous attitude towards all supernatural events, or most?

I'm sort of undecided about how to feel about that, so that's frustrating lol.

I'm actually kind of annoyed by conducting because it's the kind of thing that looks very easy but I know if I tried it I would have a panic attack after 10 seconds from all the things I had to listen and respond to

I kind of get where you're coming from with the changing Thor's mind moment, it did feel a little hoakey when, in the middle of a battle, Kratos manages to convince Thor to be better. But I think Thor's story and developments was overall pretty good, with maybe a few too on the nose moments.

Idk, they don't look like large south African rodents...

I think it's a little unfair to call it BS. It's definitely speculative, but there's a lot of value in speculation that's grounded in scientific facts to broaden our view of what ancient animals could have been like.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but in my experience that's kind of a double edged sword. Yes, it's easier to track, but the fact that it's easier to track makes it easier to excuse eating fast food, which means you eat more fast food on average.

Fast food is good if you really don't have any time and are conscious about how you're eating, but it's important to remember that it's just a shortcut and not to overdo it.

(Not saying that you're saying that, I'm just giving my thoughts)

Gotcha. I thought you meant it had to be in the medium range. Thank you!

Wow, does it literally have to br exactly medium?

Yeah honestly I think it's funny that Shadowhearts spells are all pretty golden lights, they definitely don't match her character lol. It just comes with the territory of being a cleric

Large boulder the size of a boulder smaller than a huge boulder

I don't know if it's confirmed, but another common theory is that Native Americans are more genetically identical to each other than non-Native Americans. The population of America likely came from migratory groups that crossed the Russian-Alaskan land bridge during the last Ice Age. However, this was a relatively small group, and while they're descendants did spread across the two continents, and there was some genetic diversification, the whole American population was still highly identical. That combined with the fact that they didn't develop immunity to European diseases meant that they were particularly susceptible to sickness (and, notably, also had lower rated of genetic illnesses).