>Bro shut the fuck up lmao. You’re too high on your own supply to realize that you ARE biased.

Charged language? What exactly did I say that was incorrect? Have you ever seen what happens with something like an untreated ectopic pregnancy?

How would you describe an organism that will literally siphon every last resource from its host without regard for that host?

>A parasite is when ANOTHER SPECIES takes nutrients from its host.

If the egg somehow escapes the protection provided by the uterus, THEN it effectively becomes a parasite as it will feed, damage, and eventually kill the host.

>Pregnancy is NOT parasitic by nature. That is not parasitism, which is an unwanted attack on the host.

Pretty sure a fertilized egg outside of a uterus is an unwanted attack on the host.

>I said you think its freaky because of the charged language you use when talking about standard biological facts.
>
>“Voracious parasite” “vampire” “ravenous appetite”

How are those inaccurate descriptions? A fertilized egg outside of the uterus acts like a voracious parasite. It literally starts sucking the life out of the mother and will consume everything it can.

>You don’t think those carry any sort of negative connotation? You think you’re just speaking straight facts?

I'm sorry, but I thought we were discussing what happens when pregnancies go wrong. There really aren't a whole lot of positive things to say about ectopic or molar pregnancies. In fact, they're pretty f*cking terrible and you better hope no one you know and care about ever has to experience them, especially if they live in a red state.

You want "straight facts"? Okay. An ectopic pregnancy will put you through an unimaginable amount of pain and suffering and then kill you. Is that better?

>but you don’t have to use phrases that carry such negative connotations.

Would you prefer flowery prose?

>Thats far from how a scientist would describe these things.

Formal descriptions are reserved for scientific journals. When they talk to the general public, they use terms the general public will understand.

>Teenagers should understand how this works, but they should also not be told that a fertilized egg is a “vampiric parasite that has a ravenous appetite and will kill you if it gets the chance.”

That isn't what I said. This is what I said, with the context you chose to leave out:

For example, a fertilized human egg is not some gentle little thing growing peacefully within the uterus. A fertilized human egg is actually an incredibly voracious parasite that will attach itself to whatever it can and, like a vampire, will drain it of every last nutrient.

Hence why women have uteruses protecting them from the egg. With the vast majority of pregnancies, the fact that a fertilized human egg can kill is no more notable than the fact you can die in car crash tomorrow. But the context of the discussion is a TIL on pregnancies going wrong. Not everyone knows that a fertilized human egg is biologically lethal. Not everyone knows that the uterus is what protects the mother from that lethality.

>You can explain that fertilized eggs/fetuses suck nutrients from their mother in the controlled environment that is the uterus. If they exist outside of that controlled environment, they can develop incorrectly and harm the mother. You see how the way i said it and the way you said it are very different?

Yes, you sugarcoated a serious medical condition. One of many related to pregnancies. You also omitted that politicians at both state and national levels are either planning or have already implemented laws that will prevent women from receiving the treatment they would need to deal with these emergencies. That's a pretty big f*cking big omission to make in this country these days.

Either way, have fun waging war on adjectives you don't like.

How is it extreme? You may not like the term, but that's what it is.

It's not "freaky", or "abhorrent". It's just science.

>Well youre putting your own little slant on it by saying shit like “voracious parasite.”

That's not a slant. That is what a fertilized egg is. Have you ever seen the end result of an untreated ectopic pregnancy?

>Literally every placental mammal works this way

Did I say anything different? Pregnancy is parasitic by nature in most mammals. The only thing that prevents a pregnancy from killing the mother is the uterus. The fertilized egg can implant and grow just about anywhere.

>People learn about this in school.

No, they really don't. They get a sugar-coated version, if they get any version at all. Hence the TIL post and the various other medical-related posts by others here describe what can go wrong and WHY we have medical procedures to deal with it.

Or rather, we did until the fanatical religious nut jobs started with their idiotic "life begins at conception" bullsh*t.

> I don’t want you telling middle schoolers in sex ed this shit just because you think its freaky

Freaky? How on Earth did you get that from what I or others have posted? These are medical facts. These are complications that can and do arise during pregnancies, and WHY they arise. These are why medical procedures to deal with them exist, and why they shouldn't be banned by far-right nut jobs.

Teenagers, especially teenage girls, should be educated on this because it can literally be life or death for them, especially if they live in a red state that can deny them treatment.

>any more than i want super christians to control sex ed

There wouldn't be sex education if "super christians" controlled sex education. They just got a principal fired because some kids saw Michelangelo's sculpture.

Because our education system is...challenged when it comes to biological education, there are some pretty big gaps when it comes to people knowing how things in the body function.

For example, a fertilized human egg is not some gentle little thing growing peacefully within the uterus. A fertilized human egg is actually an incredibly voracious parasite that will attach itself to whatever it can and, like a vampire, will drain it of every last nutrient.

The uterus, contrary to popular myth, is there to protect the mother from its ravenous appetite. It acts as a firewall to prevent the egg from killing its host. Hence why when a fertilized egg goes awry (winds up anywhere outside the uterus) it's a serious and life-threatening situation. Women can wind up dying in horrible and incredibly painful ways when things go wrong. And now, thanks to the rising far-right "Christian" nationalists creating the Neo-Inquisition, all those lovely horrible ways to die are making a comeback.

Pretty sure it was the lack of Furbys.

POTTER!

Is this the same "little-known scientific team" that brought us "Saddam is buying yellowcake!" and "Saddam has mobile weapons labs'?

The DoE's track record on intelligence leaves bit to be desired. :P

I block arrows...WITH MY FACE!

There was a fairly recent study on the impact of nuclear weapons on the ozone layer. It turns out it only takes a remarkably small number of nuclear detonations to do serious damage to the ozone layer.

So strictly from an explosive force impact nuclear weapons would not be able to destroy everything on the planet, but fire a few here and there across the world and you wouldn't need to. The UV radiation from the sun would effectively wind up sterilizing the surface of the planet.

That is categorically false. Using a fish eye lens creates visual distortions that anyone who has had any experience with optics would be able to pick up on.

Eratosthenes proved the Earth was round over 2000 years ago and even measured its circumference by putting a stick in the ground. You can do the exact same thing he did, but I doubt anything like science or math is going to sway your friend.

It's Millennial Mario and he's done with all this sh*t.

The Nissan Leaf and the Chevy Bolt are in that price range. There are a couple of others that get into that price range with incentives, but the usefulness of incentives depends on your taxes.

I have a Chevy Bolt myself, and I don't have a home charger. I just use the regular charger and plug it into a normal outlet.

If you're going to be driving for long distances on a regular basis then you'll want to consider a home charger if your place of work/destination does not have a charging station.

Citation: Math

Chevy Bolt: $26K

Comparative ICE: $26K

Average commute: 41 miles a day.

EV

Average price of electricity: $0.16/kwh

A typical EV will average around 4 miles per kwh.

Cost of commute per year EV: $426

Maintenance cost per mile for EV (according to FOEERE): $0.06

Maintenance cost per year EV: $640

Total EV Annual Cost: $1066

ICE

Average price gas: $3.41/gallon

Average MPG of car: 35 mpg

Cost of commute per year gas: $1038

Maintenance cost per mile gas (according to FOEERE): $0.10

Maintenance cost per year gas: $1066

Total ICE Annual Cost: $2104

​

The ICE on average costs about $1038 more per year than an EV. If you have solar, that gap widens even more.

Even without solar, if you swapped the ICE for a hybrid the EV is still cheaper by quite a bit.

How long has ICE technology been around in mass production?

You really are hell-bent on comparing apples to oranges. EV prices continue to drop. There are several options for EVs in the mid $20K range. Add in the fact that EVs require a fraction of the maintenance and that $10K or so price difference starts looking pretty small.

Every new EV doesn't start at 66k either. What's your point?

What are you talking about? Battery packs/drive train are warrantied for just as long, if not longer, than ICE engines.

No, you are disingenuously comparing two dissimilar markets and misapplying statistics to try and validate your argument.

This is an example of how to use statistics incorrectly. You are comparing a restricted market that was originally targeted more towards the luxury market with initial offerings to a highly competitive market loaded with tons of low-end models.

Tesla literally made up 2/3 of the market for EVs. That's going to give a ridiculously skewed metric when trying to compare against the broad ICE market.

Did it happen more than once? Probably, however, it would have been very similar in composition. There would also be practically no evidence of any additional lines as only the dominant line remained.

Is it still going on today? Most likely not. There's too much life around, and to a lot of organisms, the components required for abiogenesis look tasty.

Good ol' Floribama.

What I find amusing is that the older generations will tell you how they walked to school uphill both ways in 3 feet of snow, and will just as vehemently deny that the climate isn't destabilizing when there hasn't been three feet of snow since they were kids. :P

Hardly. Our winter temperatures have been well above normal. Where I am we'll have a couple days of cold and then temps will hit 50F next week.

Winters have been steadily going the way dodo here in New England.

Pretty much anything can stop alpha radiation. Beta radiation needs a bit more, but again it doesn't take much. So hypothetically, a typical cow patty could block some forms of nuclear radiation.

Gamma radiation, depending on the energy can penetrate lead and concrete. So unless you're talking about multiple cubic meter sized cow patties they aren't going to be blocking gamma radiation.

However, based on what this miserable idiot of judge has said I doubt he has any idea what he's actually talking about.

Are you implying that I'm a luddite? o_O

I'm not sure where you get the idea that I "fear" the upcoming technological singularity. In fact, the sooner it arrives the better. I'm eager to see how humanity deals with a post-scarcity world. Will we move beyond our selfishness and greed and use technological advances to work towards a better world? Or will those with the wealth and power turn that technology against humanity in a vain attempt to enshrine themselves at the top in perpetuity?

It's quite exciting actually.