felixrocket7835

felixrocket7835 t1_iydcpml wrote

Reply to comment by raj3458 in The Trouser Snake by Eye_Juice

I see a lot of unironic and serious remarks like this, especially on posts related to cute snakes.

There'll be a photo of a cute corn snake, full grown, and they'll be comments like "yeah they're cute and all as a baby but wait until it grows to 30 feet and EATS you!!1111"

2

felixrocket7835 t1_iydc5vn wrote

Reply to comment by raj3458 in The Trouser Snake by Eye_Juice

hate this stigma of pet snakes, i'm not even exaggerating when I say 99.9% of snakes aren't big enough to eat a human.

you're more likely to become dog food than snake food, also more likely to be killed by your pet dog than pet snake, as the majority of pet snakes have a bite equal to a kitten.

4

felixrocket7835 t1_iy0wk2c wrote

Reply to comment by KmartQuality in You see more suns at night than in the daytime. by ParticleDetector

I have never heard that definition in my life, well, except on WalesOnline.. hardly a good source.

The Sun is the name of our star, the reason people use sun for stars is due to a misconception, thinking that sun is simply a synonym for stars.

Most dictionaries define the Sun as the star which the earth orbits.

4

felixrocket7835 t1_iy04mix wrote

Reply to You see more suns at night than in the daytime. by ParticleDetector

This is objectively incorrect, the Sun is the name for OUR star, there are not multiple suns.

"The Sun is the star at the center of the Solar System."

"The star round which the earth orbits."

Couple of definitions

"Sun" isn't a label for a type of star or a different name for a star, it's just a name for the star we orbit, people often get confused as we call our moon, the moon, and other natural satellites, moons, some articles will say suns instead of stars to not confuse those with rather bad astronomy knowledge.

256

felixrocket7835 t1_itusszu wrote

Reply to comment by earic23 in A new start after 60: I wanted to do something stupid when I turned 70 – so I learned to ride a motorbike by quellerand

Do you wear high-vis gear? statistically it's more effective and is unlikely to be overly distracting, there's a reason why cyclists wear them.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/industry-news/a35952569/loud-pipes-do-not-save-lives/

https://www.motorbiscuit.com/new-study-confirms-loud-pipes-save-lives-is-safety-myth/

https://www.motorcycledirect.co.uk/motorcycle-direct-club/blog031-do-loud-pipes-save-lives.php

https://www.motopinas.com/motorcycle-news/study-loud-pipes-don-t-save-lives.html

https://riders.drivemag.com/features/why-loud-pipes-don-t-save-lives/

https://canadamotoguide.com/2016/07/29/the-truth-about-loud-pipes/

1

felixrocket7835 t1_itpghpk wrote

Reply to comment by ZellNorth in A new start after 60: I wanted to do something stupid when I turned 70 – so I learned to ride a motorbike by quellerand

Loud exhausts actually kill, not save lives, they can distract pedestrians and motorists heavily just to put attention on a bike, it can, for example, make a pedestrian not able to hear an oncoming car because some biker has an extremely loud exhaust which is 5x louder than the cars around him.

No proper study has ever concluded that loud exhausts save lives.

1