RhetHypo

Modern starters are like furry OCs, not a species of creature. "My OC is a gorilla that plays wooden drums! Well my OC shoots people with water like a sniper, well my oc plays soccer with a fireball!" Vs "What if there were giant turtles with water cannons roaming around"

If the idea of an intelligent, transcendent creator wasn't tied to any religion, I'm certain most scientists would accept it as the most plausible explanation for why the universe exists and why it appears so designed and finely-tuned for life. Many scientists are put off the idea of a creator by traditional religion (or maybe more accurately, by religious people). Others (a small minority) hate the idea of anything existing that's more intelligent than they are. I'm not saying we should get rid of religion so that scientists will believe in God. I'm explaining that the objection to the mere idea of God – an intelligent, transcendent creator – mostly isn't based on logic or lack of evidence, it's rooted in rejection of religion. A recent conversation with an atheist biologist supports this. He was raised Catholic, and his objections to God stemmed entirely from his objection to miracles and Catholic doctrines, which he rejected as a teen. He didn't have any logical objections to God, himself, but to religious claims. To him, God was so inextricably tied to those claims that God got thrown out along with them. So, why don't scientists just acknowledge a deistic sort of God while rejecting religion? I wonder about this a lot. As near as I can tell, some of them dislike religion and religious people so much they'll jettison the truth over it. I recall the biology grad student I talked with decades ago who agreed that developments in biology supported design, but said he and his colleagues were hesitant to publicly acknowledge it, because it would support Christians. *sigh* What a mess. It's complicated, y'all. If you're Christian, keep this in mind when you have conversations with science-minded atheists. And here's something most of us don't want to hear: The way we conduct ourselves may be the only Gospel some people ever receive – and that includes our children. They "hear" how we behave far more than what we say.

People keep bringing up the Destiny debate, but this was the point where it all went wrong for Jonny boy.

This is neat to me . This dude is inherently agreeing with my core point that jokes have meaning. Usually these guys disagree that jokes mean anything at all, so it rules to me that these guys are now being forced to adapt their arguments to focus on what's actually being said

I dabbled in coding once and the complete inability to get more experienced programmers to understand that I wanted my stuff as efficient as possible was a major factor in deciding not to pursue it further. It was literally impossible. Every solution they offered amounted to 'add this million line external function library to your codebase and just use the 0.001% that is relevant to your needs'. Drove me mad. I don't care if the game I'm coding for can run on a smart watch nowadays, I WANT IT TO RUN EFFICIENTLY.

I feel like every question about Invincible’s logic or lore just exposes how many people simply don’t understand the stuff they watch. Like I legit haven’t seen a single post like this that isn’t already addressed in the actual show. They were not worried about their population until the virus. You saw billions and billions of dead viltrumite around the planet due to the virus because even after the purge, there was still a shit ton of them left.

5 years ago today, John Walker brutally murdered a Flag Smasher and tarnished the Captain America mantle in ‘THE FALCON AND THE WINTER SOLDIER’

The joke is JK Rowling is insane because she believes men are men and women are women