Lol, since when do bureaucratic approvals produce consistent outcomes?

LOL how about horizontal gene transfer, and Eukaryotes being a merger of Alphaproteobacteria (and cyanobacteria for the photosynthesizing ones) and Asgard Archea.

It’s all interconnected, intertwined, nature man! Holobionts and shit.

Or, to express it differently: Thanks for digging through the mud to share diamonds with us :*

deleted by creator

I guess you are better at stealing then ¯\(ツ)/¯

I don’t know where to write it so I put it here (awesome meme, my comment is offtop): I recently had a bit of free time between my PhD, activism, slacking, and just being there for my close ones. I thought, well, let’s do something good for the Fediverse. I love c/science_memes at mander.xyz, so I reasoned: let’s go to reddit and s t e a l some memes for this community. I searched for science memes on reddit and oh boy, they were crappy. Not a single one deserving to be here (if you cross-post to reddit, first stop, but also sorry I was there on a different day). Gosh it made me appreciate this place. Please, keep on being awesome and, since idk who you are and don’t want to be unrealistic, I can only wish you a median-good day.

Wow, you can see its environment is 3D, pleasure to watch!

Awesome footage, thanks for sharing!

Lol it doesn’t matter what did he know he knew less physics lol

This is an important question with real-life implications.

Okay. I need a physicist. How does that relate to the heat death of the universe. Is all iron-56 the most probable distribution of energy in the universe (max entropy)?

The Hidden Life of Trees, vol. 2

Žižek: "Trump did what The Left couldn’t"

Trump: Sniffs

There is an interesting interpretation of Zizek saying that he is practicing an unusual, if not new, form of rhetoric/reasoning which is aiming exactly at this kind of dissonance. I’ve seen it in the Philosophize This podcast, but they might have gotten it from elsewhere. It goes like this:

1. Start with a point that the public/target group generally agrees to. Or at least it is clearly understandable. It can even be a fact. Like: there is a huge industry around automatizing sex activities, sex toys could basically have sex with each other.
2. Arrive at a point when an obvious opinion is expect. For example: There is an expectation to hear that sex toys having sex with each other is just absurd and dehumanizing and shows their futile purpose.
3. Put a twist on it, when you come to a logical yet unobvious conclusion. For example: Sex toys can relieve performance pressure, and people can enjoy their love life more (while Zizek’s example is absurd, sex toys actually help many couples with that in much more plain ways).

Now it usually shows some kind of absurd. For example, sexual puritanism usually lauds calm love life practices - like a chat over a tea with no sexual pressure - but they might be easier to achieve with the help of obscene technology or practices, which release the performance pressure.

His style at least provokes (some) people to think and question dogmas. But it will make any movement aiming at radical coherence or agreement within a group have a beef with him. And you can find incoherence or incompleteness in any way of thinking (summoning the ghost of Gödel for the ultimate proof). And the attitude towards its own shortcomings tells you something about the movement.

Common, no shark is that old, not to mention all of them.

Who the fuck is Tina Belcher?

R was around in 2010, lol

You heard about conda/containers/pixi/whatever?

PS: Excel will often fail if your system has a different default language. Like in many European countries one and a half is 1,5, not 1.5. Excel can’t take it.

Yeah, I think it might be a Crustacean or a Tardigrade. In the latter case, I am happy with the phylum name. But for a Crustacean (or some other arthropod) I would like to know better…