all 67 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 82 points 4 months ago (11 children)

Worked as a physicist for 30 years, nobody talks like that. Everyone else in the room is to smart, and will slap you down for using absolutes.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 44 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    >nobody
    You should be slapped as well then.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Well it’s about time someone picked up on that one. It was low hanging fruit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    For some reason your comment makes me think of this

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Bismuth has joined the chat

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 7 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Straight lines are it’s Bismuth.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Is the gas form called Bismeth?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 4 months ago

    Straight line and sharp corners in almost all crystals.

    Nice eg. in Ireland

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago (17 children)

    Most scientists won't say that there are no straight lines in nature, it's so obviously and provably wrong. I think it's more of a thing philosophically said when talking about how modern life is so different and unnatural compared to the lives of ancient people or animals.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I wonder if there's any animals who see crystals in nature and think "wow that's a really cool rock".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (12 children)

    what is 'natural' life, being a sustenance farmer, and dying of starvation if you have a bad harvest?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    Agriculture is already somewhat unnatural, so I guess a "natural" life would be hunter gatherers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Are you trying to say that we don't follow the laws of nature? That our activities are supernatural?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Buddy, what is natural about me, a person who has never met you, talking to you, a person I have never met. How the hell doss that make any sense. Fuckin' superpowers m8. All up in this gadget.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    I'd say this device I hold in my hands is the natural result of a social species who gained enough intelligence to mostly master their environment enough to spread globally, but still has the social need to stay connected to the tribe wherever they are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    oh I see, so if you aren't a roving band of stone age people, then it's unnatural?

    and are these societies also matriarchal or something too, because you know the patriarchy is unnatural as well?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Kind of, humans were hunter gatherers for so long that we evolved to be good at it, so I guess that's what would be natural for us.

    Agriculture and our current life hasn't been around long enough for us to properly adapt to it.

    I have no idea if those societies were patriarchal or matriarchal, I would imagine both happened or maybe even some sort of equality, if you want to know more about this go ask an expert in the field.

    But in the end I don't care what you do, I just continued your argument.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    just because someone calls themself a scientist doesnt mean they are, as evidenced by that post

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Wildcats are nature, they have multiple very sharp corners.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    And this is why absolute statements are generally bad arguments. It only takes one example to disprove them.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Does it still have straight lines under a microscope?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Does it still have straight lines if you look really closely?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    well done OP, you really stuck it to those stupid scientists

    /s

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    We exist within nature, so nature created linear particle accelerators.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago

    Technically fibers in wood is straight.

    I want to say ice has straight edges

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I must confess, this sparked a laugh

    This pointiness, it’s nature’s gaff

    Give me a siiiiign

    Fool me baby one more time

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    those lines are never straight...

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Yo, these jokes hit different when you Big Brain!

  • source