So your argument is basically "lots of people discriminate, so that means that the discrimination is correct"? Because we can find about a million examples from history to learn why that is not a sound argument.

Societally normalized biphobia?

Genuine question: How would this be better? Isn't the choice essentially choosing a larger evil to prevent a smaller evil, and all the consequences that brings, in hopes that the options will somehow be different in the future?

What about the people suffering in the meanwhile who wouldn't have been otherwise? What if it results in further voter suppression so that an ally candidate has a much harder time actually getting elected?

I genuinely understand that it absolutely sucks when the options are awful or even worse, we should demand more from our representatives and we should do everything we can to remove those who refuse to represent all of their constituency, but I can't see how letting the worse option win is better.

Now I'm thinking about making badges that say "Assigned Child At Birth".

I'd say one downside with those buildings is that sound travels really easily between neighboring apartments and they often tend to get quite cold in the winter, although I'm not sure how other buildings from the same time period compare.

Definitely beats being homeless though.

It's super easy, barely an inconvenience.

In theory, as long as there is nothing ferromagnetic inside what you put into the center of the coil, there shouldn't be anything happening at all, harmful or otherwise.

That being said, please don't stick bodyparts inside workshop tools.

So, A0 has an area of 1 m^2^ and it's halved for each next one in the series, giving A85 a surface area of 1/(2^85^) m^2^ = 2.585×10^-26^ m^2^ = 0.02585 pm^2^.

The smallest atom is the hydrogen atom with a Van der Waals radius of 120 pm which gives it a surface area of 4×π×120^2^ pm^2^ = 180956 pm^2^ or just over 7 million times larger than the A85.

While everyone else seems to be slugging H20 from 40-ounce Stanley tumblers, I have never understood the appeal of drinking plain, tasteless water all day.

The question feels more pressing than ever given rising temperatures, heat waves

The combination of these two takes has to be among the dumbest things I've ever read, what do they think those other drinks are made of? I'm entirely certain that the process of making another drink uses up more water than just drinking that volume of water in the first place.

That was El-Sayed, not Mamdani. Mamdani is the mayor of New York.

Why would a few thousand scientists be impossible for an entire continent to accommodate?

No country or continent would have the resources to just accept all those climate scientists.

Just how many climate scientists do you think there are in the US?