flerp

joined 1 year ago
[–] flerp@lemm.ee 34 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sadly I think it's the last one. Of course I can't read his mind, but I honestly think he is just as lame and broken as he seems.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 221 points 2 months ago (7 children)

Trump: makes incorrect claim

Moderator: Actually there is no evidence that happened

Trump: well I saw it on TV! Someone said it on TV! Someone wouldn't just go and say something on TV if it wasn't true!

Shouldn't the president of the country have a bit of higher standard of evidence than "I saw someone say it on TV"?

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

Wait, doesn't everybody walk around with a pocket psychrometric chart?

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

I'm lawful neutral until the clip breaks, which it always does, and then I go chaotic neutral.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 7 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Wait, what happened here? Is this picture supposed to be offensive somehow? Is there a place you can see deleted lemmy comments like you can see deleted reddit comments?

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

The corporations can fuck right off because they steal more from creators than pirates ever could. But directly supporting independent creators you like is a good thing that should be lauded. Someone dying penniless in the street because they chose to make things that enhanced people's lives instead of going into a soul sucking banking career or some shit is a travesty if you ask me.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 5 points 2 months ago

I still think mechanical watches are a pretty neat idea. I also never forget my towel so there's some hope for me yet.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 25 points 2 months ago (3 children)

That's father than I would take it personally

[–] flerp@lemm.ee -2 points 2 months ago

That's not my theory. That's the data.

One interpretation could be that women were constantly engaged in strenuous endurance activities and so through evolution built up tolerances against exhaustion that at least rivals if not exceeds that of men. And one historical activity that used a lot of stamina and took a lot of tolerance against fatigue was the way in which ancient humans hunted.

That's not what a theory is, it's a hypothesis at best, hope that helped.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Women were first allowed to compete in marathons in 1972. In 1972 the men's record was 2:10:30. The current record is 2:00:35 which is about an 8% difference. Pretty close to the difference between men and women currently.

The first women's record was 3:40:22 and the current women's record is 2:11:53.11 which is 40% faster.

Once funding for women's athletics reaches parity and once girls are encouraged into athletics as much as boys, then we will see if the ladies catch up. So far they're doing a pretty good job catching up, and you can't look at one current window in time and say you have the answer, you need to look at trends.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 5 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Evidence shows that women have better endurance for long distances. They tend to be less susceptible to fatigue and beyond 195 miles are actually faster than men. Considering humans were better at outlasting their prey and chasing them to exhaustion rather than burst speed, this data indicates that women are at least as capable as men at those tasks if not better.

[–] flerp@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

You don't call a lion immoral because lions can't comprehend morality. That doesn't mean that humans can do the same actions without being judged morally. Lions can also kill other lions which would be more comparable to murder than your hunting example and still they wouldn't be held morally responsible and yet humans would if they killed another human. A lot of animals rape too, doesn't mean it's moral for humans to do.

The difference is that we CAN understand morality which is why we are held to moral standards and animals aren't. This is like, pretty basic stuff and shouldn't be at all confusing. Maybe read a book or two before having loud opinions?

view more: next ›