1
inkbourne 1 point ago +1 / -0

That is not a valid answer. Try again.

1
inkbourne 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh wow! I did not know that. Where did you get this information from?

2
inkbourne 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah I saw that part where the potato camera captured light on the horizon during what seemed to be the start of a lunar eclipse. Refraction is real.

2
inkbourne 2 points ago +2 / -0

People who believe Earth is flat are just as delusional as people who believe they are born in the wrong body. Lunar eclipses are easily explained when you live in reality.

2
inkbourne 2 points ago +2 / -0

Earth's shape is round during a lunar eclipse.

3
inkbourne 3 points ago +3 / -0

The full quote comes from the book "Carbon Shift: How Peak Oil and the Climate Crisis Will Change Canada (and Our Lives)" and says:

The concept of net energy must also be applied to renewable sources of energy, such as windmills and photovoltaics. A two-megawatt windmill contains 260 tonnes of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The question is: how long must a windmill generate energy before it creates more energy than it took to build it? At a good wind site, the energy payback day could be in three years or less; in a poor location, energy payback may be never. That is, a windmill could spin until it falls apart and never generate as much energy as was invested in building it.

1
inkbourne 1 point ago +1 / -0

I beg to differ. Anyone can fall prey to excessive social media consumption. I believe people use social media platforms as distractions from their real-life problems. Social media platforms tune their algorithms to keep these people engaged for longer stretches of time. Likes and upvotes are the equivalent of receiving gifts and giving gifts; Or receiving approval and giving approval. It is a constant stream of dopamine and serotonin.. an addictive social media cocktail.

2
inkbourne 2 points ago +2 / -0

An egg is not a chicken, but a fertilized egg is a chicken. A seed is a tree. A zygote is a person.

1
inkbourne 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thank you for elaborating. Do you happen to know how much more efficient a vehicle with half a tank of gas vs. a full tank of gas is? It is a negligible amount.

Lithium can be recycled. Coal gets used up. Both have negative impact on the environment. Only one of them can sustain long term energy needs. The focus will eventually turn to large-scale recycling of lithium batteries instead of mining.

Electric vehicle batteries will become safer over time with advancements such as solid-state cells that will be making their way in to electric vehicles within the next 5-10 years.

1
inkbourne 1 point ago +1 / -0

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "burdensome deadweight" and "absolutely abysmal". That is loaded language that does not provide any insight as to what your argument is. How often do electric car batteries ignite? I agree that oil and hydrocarbons are more efficient. I also agree on the solar farms point.

1
inkbourne 1 point ago +1 / -0

I agree that marketing is one big lie. I have never relied on marketing to make purchases. Driving electric is a lifestyle choice that not everybody can commit to. That is perfectly fine. I hold the opinion that more energy sources is better for everybody.

2
inkbourne 2 points ago +2 / -0

You would need a combination of between twenty and thirty 300W and 500W panels plus battery storage to reliably power the average home all year entirely with solar energy.

1
inkbourne 1 point ago +1 / -0

Bioplastics can replace most petrochemical plastics and both can be recycled. Solar panels can be recycled, but are usually not because it is expensive to recycle them. Batteries can also be recycled to extract cobalt, lithium salt concentrate, stainless steel, copper, aluminum and plastic from them. Not everything is black and white.

-2
inkbourne -2 points ago +3 / -5

A single 300W solar panel can provide enough energy to power a Tesla for 1000 miles over the course of a year. Ten 300W solar panels can provide enough energy to replace themselves and power a Tesla for 20,000 miles over the course of two years while continuing to provide energy for the next 23 years. With ten 300W solar panels the expected output would be enough to charge a Tesla for its entire life and produce another 100-120 solar panels. Coal is necessary as a main energy source for now, but it does not have to always be that way.

EDIT This is just math regarding the expected output of a 300W solar panel over the course of its expected lifetime using a Tesla for example. What solar panels power and them not be recycled because of cronyism are two separate discussions.

2
inkbourne 2 points ago +2 / -0

Only if the originally created purpose contains that intent. If so, then certainly.

In regards to copyright law, yes. In general use, no.

Don't you think that's a good thing?

I think words alone are not harmful. In public spaces, all words are acceptable. This is a public space, so all words should be allowed in my opinion. Even the ones I do not like.

Is deceiving someone in order to manipulate them is OK?

Deceit is not good. Intolerance for speech is also not good. The point I was making is that intolerance for speech is not made any better by being honest about it.

Is disagreeing with someone's opinion intolerance?

No.

To say, "I do not want you in my house to discuss your view of the benefits of pedophilia", is this intolerance?

Yes it is intolerance.

So, I guess you are promoting the idea that Christian schools founded on Christian ethics are hypocrites if they do not want teachers in their school who teach that there are 120+ genders and that men can be pregnant?

That is intolerance, but not hypocrisy.

people are free to create forums for discussing specific ideas and concepts, and not for discussing others.

Yes, people are free to do that. Making fun of people who are intolerant of certain words on said forum is still hypocrisy, though.

Are you OK with someone coming into your home and seducing your wife (or husband) and educating your kids in debauchery?

I would assume there is no consent in this hypothetical scenario, so the answer would be no.

I would like to clarify something. I do not have an issue with intolerance. I am intolerant of many things. I dread the idea of my child being tainted by these crazy ideologies people have going on. However crazy I may find them, they have the right to say whatever they want. My issue is with hypocrisy.

2
inkbourne 2 points ago +2 / -0

A creator of something has every right to define the purpose of what they create. However, when someone creates a thing for others, the people using the thing collectively define the purpose. This is the case with a huge list of things. You have an extravagant way of defending hypocrisy. Openly saying you do not tolerate opinions intentionally held to oppose your own does not make you better than those who hide it. People are free to do as they please as long as it does not harm others.

1
inkbourne 1 point ago +1 / -0

It means that one regulation wasn't enough. One regulation may have slowed things. Fifty may have slowed them more.

How does regulation contribute to solving the problem? Regulation is just another word for rule, and people break rules.

Education needs a complete overhaul. The average person does not care about learning how they can fix the problem because "Climate science is enormously complicated". If we want to generate maximum impact against humans synthetically altering the climate... we should have clear instructions on how to do so.

Money needs an upgrade. Time is our most valuable resource. Every day it becomes more expensive to purchase money with our time. If people didn't have to worry so much about money, they could focus more of their time on issues that they can not afford to think about.

Society needs a redesign. We have a greater impact against all kinds of issues when we focus on what we can do in our local communities. I detest the idea that bigger government enforcing regulations is what we need to solve our problems. Enforcing regulations is just as hard as properly educating people, but education has a greater impact.

So we should focus our efforts on education, and we should work together in our local communities to do so. Let us start with that as soon as possible, and then we can work towards the larger goals of humanity.

1
inkbourne 1 point ago +1 / -0

What research makes it "obvious" that Earth is flat? I am open to having my mind changed on any subject, but I have yet to see or hear a single piece of evidence that makes any logical sense. I am going to pretend Earth is flat for a second: Why are they trying to hide the fact that Earth is flat? What is there to gain from making people believe Earth is round?

2
inkbourne 2 points ago +2 / -0

As of 30 minutes ago:

Due to the overwhelming demand at launch, we are currently rate-limited on onboarding new users to the platform. We are working to increase signup capacity for onboarding and will continue to update this status as capacity increases.

view more: Next ›