nexguy
@nexguy@lemmy.world
No thoughts
- Comment on I say kill 'em all. 1 day ago:
“Bti toxins are activated only by the alkaline digestive systems of specific Nematocera larvae (mosquitoes, black flies).”
Plus you only use it in a specific place… not a large body of water.
- Comment on I say kill 'em all. 1 day ago:
Mosquito Dunks or Mosquito Bits
- Comment on I say kill 'em all. 1 day ago:
Put out a dedicated standing water source but lace it with eco-friendly Bti that kills the larve.
- Comment on Anon disrespects their elders 3 days ago:
Ok boomer
p.s. boomer is anyone one nanosecond older than you.
- Comment on Hopefully, he will be 6 underground by that time. 4 days ago:
Immigrants, trans, Ukrainians, women… these groups are a sacrifice white male leftists are willing to make.
- Comment on [deleted] 5 days ago:
So how about doing exactly what your said, primary better candidates… but in the mean time also not have the nazi in office crippling the nation for a few generations. Why handicap yourself?
- Comment on [deleted] 5 days ago:
You have to add 10 more Palestinians to the GOP side.
- Submitted 6 days ago to [deleted] | 1 comment
- Submitted 1 week ago to [deleted] | 51 comments
- Comment on noo not the cashier 1 week ago:
Can’t handle the “you too” phrase
- Comment on The sun is a deadly laser... 1 week ago:
The dark side of your body in space is freezing cold while the light side gets hot. You really need to rotate to get that even crispy layer.
- Comment on PROTIP 1 week ago:
Real pro tip, you can glue a crayon sharpener AND a pencil sharpener to the stalk. You can also roll up a cheat sheet and put it in the barrel as people tend to not look in there.
- Comment on Retro StarCraft prizes 1 week ago:
I think a lot of people think that yet the people who did have bitcoin when they were a few bucks each sold it at $70, or $300, or $900, or $1700… very few people have held on all this time.
- Comment on Praise Be 2 weeks ago:
Are we really debating the sky wizard role playing game book?
- Comment on The developers of PEAK, explaining how they decided on pricing for their game. 2 weeks ago:
I remember when I saw my first main() I just started writing code only inside of it. That seemed to work so I kept going. 20 years later I’ve only ever written code inside that same main(). I’ve changed jobs 4 times. Just… if(job==0)… or if(job==3)… Works like a charm.
- Comment on If God had wanted us to have nearly unlimited clean energy, He would have placed a fusion reactor into the sky. 2 weeks ago:
Better solar power extractor.
- Comment on Withdrawals 2 weeks ago:
Now we need to switch that to AI processing.
- Comment on Mandola effect 4 weeks ago:
“And you people, you’re all astronauts, on some kind of star trek”
- Comment on But think of the landlords! 4 weeks ago:
The only thing more depressing than left wing architecture is right wing architectureImage
- Comment on Tankie 1 month ago:
I don’t care at all of this is im14andthisisdeep. I love it
- Comment on Sad Ganymede noises 1 month ago:
Can you explains the knitpicking? They specifically decided that only objects orbiting our star can be Planets. It wasn’t an oversight but intentional. How can that be explained? Why do that?
Also, how can mercury be explained? It clearly violated one of the 3 rules with no given exception other than they just decided it can be a planet. Why?
25% of the 8 objects they wrote rules for needed an exception to make the cut. That doesn’t seem odd?
- Comment on Sad Ganymede noises 1 month ago:
There is nothing difficult to grasp. They made rules then decided for no reason to let mercury break the rule. Why? Why not make mercury a dwarf planet instead of allowing it with no rule exception other than…just because.
This is not bioligical… those MUST follow the rules. This was a traditional unscientific last… Exactly like constellations. Why not start removing stars from constellations because they are too far away? Except a couple of them just because.
This IAU conference vote was not unanimous… it was very contentious and many wanted a more geological and broad definition rather than an earth centered definition that literally ONLY applies to our solar system. “Planets” can only exist around OUR Sun. Think about that.
- Comment on Sad Ganymede noises 1 month ago:
I understand the exception created for Neptune. But they had to create this exception… for their own brand new rule… in order to classify 8 things. Notice the exception is written very specifically just to keep pluto from “clearing” is orbit.
Another IAU rule is that the body must assume hydrostatic equilibrium(nearly round). Mercury does NOT assume hydrostatic equilibrium. They knew this.
Guess what? They just…decided…Mercury doesn’t have to follow that rule.
It was all done very unscientifically.
- Comment on Sad Ganymede noises 1 month ago:
It’s a fine metaphor but it doesn’t work for scientific definitions which are exact. The IAU came up with the rule then had to make an exception to their own brand new rule in order to have Neptune remain a planet but not pluto even though both fail the rule. The exception is real and written down, not assumed.
Yet again another of the IAU rules is the body has to be assume hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round). Mercury is NOT in hydrostatic equilibrium and they knew this. So they just…decided… that Mercury is a planet anyway and does not have to follow that rule.
So two planets don’t even follow the rules they made yet were unscientifically decided to be planets. Why? What was the point of it? Certainly wasn’t done for any scientific reason.
- Comment on Sad Ganymede noises 1 month ago:
If the definition of a planet is that it has cleared is orbit then how is Neptune a planet? It shares its orbit with the dwarf planet pluto therefore they should both be dwarf planets correct?
- Comment on Sad Ganymede noises 1 month ago:
The definition of planet should be what it is, a traditional unscientific category based on history… like constellations. Calling Mercury a planet and Jupiter a planet as though they are similar in almost any way is silly scientifically.
Perhaps leave the traditional planets category alone and create new categories that could pertain to all systems not just ours. Maybe something like terrestrial planets, gas planets, dwarf planets… etc. Categories that won’t have to change any time a new discovery is made.
- Comment on Sad Ganymede noises 1 month ago:
I agree except in this instance the goal was to keep Earth’s classification important. No other scientific objective. Just seemed very geocentric to me.
- Comment on Sad Ganymede noises 1 month ago:
Yes, that’s the made up exception. And for neptune not clearing its orbit due to pluto crossing that orbit? Well we have to make an exception for that so…um…the resonance between neptune and pluto. Exception achieved!
The rules are so contrived that it would not make sense for almost any other system except exactly ours. Whatever it takes to keep Earth’s category of “planet” important… you know… for reasons.
Very unscientific but very human.
- Comment on Sad Ganymede noises 1 month ago:
Well of course that was the exception they had to come up with for their contrived rule. The exception is: “whatever it takes to make pluto not a planet”. Since the vote was agenda fueled and not a scientific discussion.
Once something new is discovered and breaks the rules they will have to modify the contrived rule to keep pluto not a planet.
- Comment on Sad Ganymede noises 1 month ago:
Jupiter has a permanent cloud of asteroids that follow it and neptune crosses the orbit of pluto so neither of those have cleared their orbits so of course they made exceptions so that their contilrived definition fits.
