why

6.5K posts

why

why

@MaslWhy

nothin

Katılım Ocak 2016
45 Takip Edilen101 Takipçiler
snow
snow@mhmsnow·
@BernkeNoBread @nikicaga "unlike heterosexual women, I am actually attracted to men" im not attracted to women but i am attracted to men. but objectively men are not as hot as women
English
2
0
0
164
why
why@MaslWhy·
@ploretariat1949 @my_dear_topaz If the country you lived in had the same mindset of what you support you would've been rounded up in some camp for being an inhuman traitor already. Maybe for the better
English
0
0
7
107
Ahn🇰🇵🇳🇵
Ahn🇰🇵🇳🇵@ploretariat1949·
@my_dear_topaz I love cops in anti-imperialist countries because the bash the skulls in of inhuman traitors. I hate first world police because they just brutalize poor people.
English
8
1
6
1.4K
why
why@MaslWhy·
@DenRak1 @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto we dont know how life came to exist or all the compounds and conditions that made life happen, so trying to replicate that in a controlled environment and failing is no surprise to anyone. this doesn't imply the need of mind to force life into existence
English
1
0
0
21
Den Rak
Den Rak@DenRak1·
@MaslWhy @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto Again, not from non living compounds into life. I told you that multiple times. You cant throw amino acids, nucleoside bases, phospholipids etc into any natural sterile conditions and have them form into a living organism .
English
1
0
0
13
Den Rak
Den Rak@DenRak1·
@MaslWhy @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto Yet all we know of random chemistry it can not and does not occur naturally. Even in natural conditions that are suitable to keeping organic components stable. Everything we know about how chemical reactions work is opposed to formation of life from non life in natural conditions
English
1
0
0
19
why
why@MaslWhy·
@DenRak1 @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto i dont think the analogy is appropriate. the watch isnt a natural machine that exists as a consequence of physical and chemical laws. so yes, to find a watch you'd probably deduce that it wasnt created by nature guiding it into existence, this isnt the same for chemical reactions
English
1
0
0
20
Den Rak
Den Rak@DenRak1·
@MaslWhy @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto So can we when we deduce chemical reactions in biochemistry because to recreate them, we have to input catalysts at specific points and do it in controlled conditions. To recreate watch parts the same needs to be done.
English
1
0
0
15
why
why@MaslWhy·
@DenRak1 @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto well, yeah if we want to replicate them intentionally then it would be by definition done by a "mind", but that doesn't mean they inherently need a mind to occur. these are reactions that happen in nature on their own, you're just deciding that they need a mind
English
1
0
0
12
Den Rak
Den Rak@DenRak1·
@MaslWhy @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto You don’t know wether that was the case in abiogenesis. But to replicate those reactions and a system of storing the genetic information to create a system that produces those reactions one needs intelligent intervention.
English
1
0
0
12
why
why@MaslWhy·
@DenRak1 @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto whether abiogenesis happened with or without a mind is not something we can possibly say with our current knowledge about origin of life, and i don't see why you're confident that it needs an intelligent mind
English
1
0
0
14
why
why@MaslWhy·
@DenRak1 @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto I didn't say that because reactions in lifeforms work in a mindless way then life must have arose in a mindless way. I just mentioned that chemical reactions *can* happen without an intelligent when you claimed they dont.
English
2
0
0
21
why
why@MaslWhy·
@DenRak1 @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto Hm? I'm not sure what you mean. most chemical reactions happen without an intelligent mind throughout the universe. Even inside your own body chemical reactions are happening without any intelligent mind guiding them
English
1
0
1
19
Den Rak
Den Rak@DenRak1·
@MaslWhy @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto What about abiogenesis? In general chemistry, reactions stay stagnant and/or break down. They do not progress into extensive integrated systems, only when intelligent interventions are inputed.
English
1
0
0
19
why
why@MaslWhy·
@DenRak1 @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto That was an example of a mindless process shaping life. Who's to say that the mindless process that brought existence has to be exactly like evolution? It's not like the parallels you mentioned are exactly the same as god either
English
1
0
1
28
why
why@MaslWhy·
@DenRak1 @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto These parallels don't hold, because you're using them to create a being that doesn't follow the rules you set for existence of all things we observe. Otherwise I can use the same logic with evolution, a mindless process that shaped our forms and minds
English
1
0
1
33
Den Rak
Den Rak@DenRak1·
@MaslWhy @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto We have many parallels. In order to recreate biochemical processes, extensive intelligent input and controlled conditions are required. In order to recreate logical thinking processes like a mind, for example AI, intelligent minds and very complex devices must be used.
English
1
0
0
25
why
why@MaslWhy·
@DenRak1 @imperatorgaia @Acts17David @GlynnErnesto It's an explanation attempt, not an example of something you observe. You have the same amount of examples of beings outside the physical and examples of mindless processes yielding life. Zero
English
2
1
1
36
why
why@MaslWhy·
@mo4ant @Mantis_Religios We're not talking about your partner having a favorite celebrity. Everyone does. It's about your partner posting about said celebrity in a sexual/romantic manner. If that's fine cuz the chance of the celebrity sleeping with your partner is low, same can be said for porn actors
English
0
0
0
58
alexᯓ
alexᯓ@mo4ant·
@MaslWhy @Mantis_Religios The difference isn’t whether something can be sexualized, it’s whether it’s inherently sexual. Porn is explicitly created for arousal. An actor existing in media or even posting a thirst trap isn’t the same baseline.
English
1
0
0
70
why
why@MaslWhy·
@NidalGhanem3 @Venice830820 نصراني وملحد في نفس الوقت؟ مش ممكن يكون كمان يهودي وهندوسي وبوذي؟
العربية
0
0
0
28
Nidal Ghanem
Nidal Ghanem@NidalGhanem3·
@Venice830820 حساب موساد صهيوني نصراني علماني ملحد حقير، حسبنا الله ونعم الوكيل فيك يا شمبانزي ياحيوان ابن حيوان
العربية
4
0
2
397
vince
vince@Venice830820·
vince tweet media
ZXX
17
6
210
5.2K
why
why@MaslWhy·
@mo4ant @Mantis_Religios The "threat" with the porn star is literally imagined too. Just because the celebrity you repost thirst traps of isn't naked doesn't mean it's not sexual
English
1
0
0
99
alexᯓ
alexᯓ@mo4ant·
@Mantis_Religios Those aren’t comparable situations. Porn is inherently sexual, so discomfort there can be a boundary. But having an issue with someone following actors or actresses, people not centered around explicit content, leans much more into insecurity, because the ‘threat’ is imagined…
English
2
0
1
199
why
why@MaslWhy·
@CHRISF0GLE The idea that you can have crushes on people other your partner as long as you don't have a chance to cheat with them is insane and probably shows you're not really in love
English
0
0
10
145
why
why@MaslWhy·
@girlcelona @Ashketchup1423 There is a difference between finding someone attractive and announcing to everyone that you find someone attractive
English
0
0
1
235

Keşfet

@mhmsnow @BernkeNoBread @nikicaga @ploretariat1949 @my_dear_topaz @DenRak1 @imperatorgaia @Acts17David