You realize that a car that runs exclusively on water would be a perpetual motion machine, right?

He cannot, sadly. He's unwilling to lie about his birthplace.

Clearly.

So you have nothing. Fair enough.

The karma argument is not going to matter to people who proudly support the industrial murder of babies. Not sure why you think this is relevant.

Edit: and to be clear, I think “venom in the water” is malicious nonsense, since snake venom is edible.

Of course I don’t have an argument. You have provided no evidence for me to argue about.

“Pithy truisms do not an argument make.” -Famous Person

:eyeroll:

Here’s the thing: Someone is going to develop a brain-computer interface. Multiple groups are working on the technology. The alternative to Musk developing it is not, as you seem to think, that the technology will not exist at all. Given that, would you prefer we cede control of the technology to the enemy?

Like we said in the other post, snake venom is edible. It’s still unwise to eat because an ulcer or wound in your digestive tract might let it into your bloodstream undigested, but it’s edible. To be even more clear, understand that snakes are not immune to their own venom, yet they eat it every time they hunt.

Snake venom is edible. You’re being made a fool.

He’s a former lib, so that’s not surprising. Give him some grace, imo.

No. I remember seeing an article on a heart like that a few years back. Basically it’s the result of a process to remove all the cells from a heart, leaving only the extracellular matrix behind. The goal being to then culture a patient’s own cells in that extracellular matrix, creating a new functional heart with no risk of rejection.

I know I’m overanalyzing this, but it’s because “fake news” is pithy and rolls off the tongue well.

I'm not sure you fully appreciate how long we have been suppressed. The reality, the history you believe in has almost nothing to do with Reality according to my investigations. History is a lie.

I don't have any trouble believing this, but I'd appreciate elaboration.

I have no problem becoming interstellar. I think that's a great idea. By all means, be fruitful and multiply, but the suggestion to do so, without first having the capacity to expand is putting the cart before the horse.

We aren't short on land or resources. Earth can support something like a trillion people before we truly reach carrying capacity(at that point our waste heat gets to be greater than we can radiate into space). I don't actually want to cram a trillion people onto Earth, but there's a lot of room between 8 billion and a trillion. And we're talking about the guy who is actually making strides towards getting us into space. Anybody else I might accept that criticism, but the guy actively developing colonization rockets? Nah.

I'm not entirely sure that's true. I think the whole "FTL" thing may be suppressed tech.

Not sure why you'd think that. There are FTL theories, but they all require magical negative energy density. We don't exactly have a lot of negative energy hanging around. And that's ignoring any and every form of FTL breaking causality in half.

Is that true, though? The people who truly advance our knowledge of the universe are quite rare, and we don’t know how to make them appear. Playing the odds by having a hundred billion times our current population spread across the galaxy seems entirely reasonable to me. Interstellar distances also prevent any form of centralized elite, as multi-year travel times demolish any attempts at centralized control.

Does this look straight to you? https://www.thoughtco.com/thmb/zblcTC1LvId7JDm5lmbMGgmuMW0=/2938x1957/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/911-TwinTowerCollapse-1355005-crop-596eca64c412440010192226.jpg It's not a pancake collapse, the whole section of skyscraper above the impact broke off and crushed everything beneath. Again I ask you, how much resistance would the lower structure offer to a hundred thousand tons of falling structure?

It didn't do so evenly; the top sections tilted then crushed the floors beneath. How much momentum does a hundred thousand tons have once it starts moving? How much resistance would the lower floors offer to that momentum? How fast would it fall if it were truly freefall? Can you answer those questions? If not, what basis do you have?

The specific fact that makes “jet fuel can’t melt steel beams” fall flat as an indicator of demolition is that structural steel loses over 80% of its strength at the temperature jet fuel burns at. What skyscraper would still stay standing at 20% strength?

It’s a joke, really. Not even a troll.

It may not have been, but that was the way I read it anyway. Regardless, I’m glad we sorted it out. The enemy benefits when we fight eachother.

It’s in quotes, meaning that section isn’t his words. The entire post is railing against the view within the quotes. Read the whole thing again, fren.

Did you?

Tech makes it easier. You can work from anywhere in the nation for any of the hundreds of companies that allow remote work.

Mega link didn't work for me on first click, thought it was bad. Worked on second try, so don't give up.