I think they serve an important ecological function of pushing down marsh grass to better the flow of water. Or something like that.

I imagine they also poop on land

Underwater chem trails

How is that idolizing him? That’s being strategic and fighting against Trump winning the election. There wasn’t a massive cult movement of people wearing Biden hats and decorating their pickup trucks with 100s of Biden stickers. Biden doesn’t have a personality cult. A lot of people who voted and would have voted for him don’t actually really like him. Still, they realize the importance of not letting Trump win.

You’re missing the point. Good attempt trying to play “BuT bOtH SiDeS” when it’s the most clear and obvious thing that idolizing a candidate is a largely problem on just one side.

You caught me. I’m the one pretending to be smug saying a meme making fun of … JD Vance (lol) …has a lot of words… JD fucking Vance lmfao… oh wait, oh yeah, that’s you. Nice try turning it around lol

My kinda party on a Friday night after a long week. Work hard, sleep hard.

Ether you love it or hate it

I’m kilosweating

Contains one (1) big bean

Is it difficult if it’s also inevitable? In a social setting, a child will either learn a language or develop one — two wild children would develop a rudimentary language that would evolve in complexity as it’s passed down generation by generation. I wonder if a feral child, who matured alone and without social interaction, could learn a language later in life. Or, if it could, how difficult it would be.

What do you mean by the critical period in learning being a byproduct of learning over time as opposed to a special feature of the brain’s age? I don’t think I grasp it. Are you saying that it’s not really the brain’s age, but rather that it hasn’t learned a lot yet? Which are distinct but highly correlated.

DO IT! DO IT!

This is the digital equivalent of walking through an open air market and having salespeople harass and follow you trying to sell something

X gon give it to ya

Brazil has a lot of gun deaths. But it’s worth keeping in mind that lots of the Amazon region is essentially a lawless “Wild West” and that specialized police units are, in fact, in war with enormous trafficking gangs. “Regular people” get shot too, of course, in violent crime incidents. But besides this, many “regular people” don’t own guns and don’t advocate for guns in the same way as in the US. There’s not really a “gun culture” that regular people participate in — it’s not an identity. Certainly not as much as the US.

I think that’s what makes the photo a valid joke and criticism of the US and that it wouldn’t work for other countries like Brazil. It’s not just looking at total gun deaths or other absolute metrics, it’s also taking into account the layers that make guns in the US a cultural symbol. The US is basically the “gun country” of the world because in the US, guns aren’t just a gang or criminal thing, they’re a “regular” thing.

The bad feelings turn into three Cronenberg lasagnas: a nihilistic Cronenberg lasagna, an existential Cronenberg lasagna, and an absurdist Cronenberg lasagna. Similar to the ghosts of Christmas in A Christmas Carol, the Cronenberg lasagnas take Rick and Morty on different journeys to teach them how to deal with bad feelings.

I also feel like it’s aggressively trying to not come across as a bot. It’s got a really intense whimsical energy that’s kinda creepy and… not human lol

Don’t appreciate (i) your disgusting example and (ii) your attitude. Most of this is obviously amounting to different interpretations of “free will” and even “omnipotence.” Ok, if it’s free with no limitations, you win, buddy. If it’s free will in the sense that, well, obviously, there are constraints, but it is precisely those constraints that give rise to different wants, desires, actions, and pursuits, and there is freedom to choose them, then ok, there might be free will. In any case, free will is vague and not precisely defined. Similarly, does omnipotence entail the ability of creating something outside of yourself? If no, then ok, the paradox stands. If not, then the paradox doesn’t.

I dunno. To be all powerful does God need to be able to create paradoxes? Things that are and aren’t? I think that by limiting choices, free will is no longer fully free.

The all loving part I think gets resolved by the free will idea, too — he’s not going to step in and be a nanny.

I’m not really advocating for some biblical God, btw. Though, admittedly, I am spiritual in different senses which might overlap with the biblical God in some ways.

My understanding is that God is big on free will, including for the angels. Angel wants to fall and be the lord of darkness? Whatever, go for it.

My own interpretation of God and Satan, which is highly limited by what I learned about the Bible when I was a kid — and thus may be extremely incorrect — is that Satan viewed God’s “requirements” of being “good” to gain eternal life in heaven to be paradoxical to free will. Following God means not making decisions for yourself. So Satan represents the rebel, the true free will, with no regard to God’s plan or will.

But there’s a trick, I think: choose to follow the path of “good.” Don’t follow God’s plan because you have to but because you want to.

This resolves the problem and Satan can go back to being “good.”

I view this all symbolically and as a metaphor for how each of us confront and balance our individuality and selfish interests with harmony and collective good.