• 0 Posts
  • 711 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 16th, 2023

help-circle






  • There’s also the possibility that the definition of stress differs. I’m in an IT position where I control most of my schedule and pace of work, I work at home without much supervision, and I’m very much a trusted employee. That means I have less body stress and other stresses than a large amount of people, but at the end of the day my mental stress can still give me headaches and wear me out (and of course real life stresses. I’m paid pretty well for the company I work at, but it’s still kinda low to be supporting myself and a family member still trying to find employment).







  • I’ve spoken with plenty of feminists, vegans, some trans people, and several right wing constitutionalists or other right wing identity. Almost every vegan I’ve talked to in RL was very pleasant and I had to know them a while or go to lunch with them to even find out they’re vegan. Trans I’ve never had a problem with, and occasionally reminded me their preferred pronouns in a very polite way (actually our mutual friends usually did instead). Feminists I’ve only found TERFs annoying.

    However the constitutionalist? I got in arguments with him about stuff like whether people should be liable for animal abuse (he claimed animals don’t have a soul so no punishment should come from harming them). He also acted like women were too emotional, but every time we got into a discussion with something he didn’t like he would be nearly yelling. If asked to be calm he’d angry claim not to be logical, not angry/emotional. He was the one we had to walk on eggshells around, while also being the main person doing “wife bad” or other misogynistic jokes.

    While that’s one example, I’ve met many others who like to be mean then retreat to “just joking” or “That’s how I grew up”, while the people you claim are more annoying are more likely to adjust to the feelings or likes or dislikes of the person they’re talking with.


  • A lot of the suppositions are done with impossible to happen stuff, like the sun literally disappearing, or collapsing into a blackhole with no added mass (a sun mass blackhole would be stable, but I don’t know how one could be created).

    If it disappeared, then we’d still feel even gravity for those 8 mins, as the effect of gravity propagated at the speed of light. If it somehow magically became a black hole, we’d still orbit it the same even after 8 mins, but losing all the head would eventually kill us.

    The expected explosion wouldn’t be what makes the earth uninhabitable either. The sun increases in luminosity by ~1% every 100 million years, and it’s estimated that between 700 million and 1.5 billion years the surface of the planet will be too hot for liquid water. An astronomer also says photosynthesis would be impossible in 500-600 million years.


  • Yes, and some animals (mostly birds iirc) do see UV. Boring brown/black birds aren’t so boring in UV. I don’t know the evolutionary pressure necessary for UV, but it could have developed. Red, for instance, is believed to have been useful for us to pick out berries. Wolves, being carnivorous, wouldn’t necessarily need it, so see in yellow blue… or so I read as a theory a while ago.



  • Yeah, JWs (I’m ex) believe climate change is foretold in Rev 11:18, which says (dunno which version, just googled, but not the JW version as it uses ruining the Earth);

    The nations raged, but your wrath came, and the time for the dead to be judged, and for rewarding your servants, the prophets and saints, and those who fear your name, both small and great, and for destroying the destroyers of the earth.

    Italics mine. JW version is bring >“to ruin those ruining the Earth.” Either way, they believe that means God will stop and destroy those bringing about climate change. Since it relies on God, it’s another one that really doesn’t help even if they believe in in, because they believe God will stop it before it’s too late.


  • I’ve looked up the original article and some other articles, and one thing I’ve noticed is the ones here on lemmy focus more on what is highest vs lowest, while some articles focused on the comparison between men and women.

    They had ~800 respondents, 48% identifying as women. They asked the same question, which I don’t know the exact question but the gist was what percentage of women found this hobby attractive. There are some disparities in perception, usually towards the more attractive than men think.

    For instance, one article pointed out men assumed 7% of women found MTG attractive, whike women responded with 28.5%. There were also charts that focused on the largest disparities:


  • chatokun@lemmy.dbzer0.comtoScience Memes@mander.xyzThings that we hate
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    Studies generally take time, so if it were months later they likely had it before you. The years later is a maybe, but also possible because it takes time to get grants to do studies as well. Exceptions tend to be more urgent stuff like the pandemic, but even then we had SARS outbreaks decades ago and they’ve been studying it for a while, even if it wasn’t specific SARS-COV-2.