ImplyingImplications

The myth of consent.

Townspeople: I consent to a bike lane!

City Council: I consent to a bike lane!

Doug Ford: I don't!

Is there someone you forgot to ask?

This is actually true! The Younger Dryas Impact is also known as the "Second Impact". The Second impact was the second of three major events taking place on Earth as a result of intervention by the First Ancestral Race. The event took place as a result of the Contact Experiment. The experiment reawakened Adam, generating an explosion that melted the Antarctic ice caps and shifted the Earth's axis. The scientists subdued Adam, but they were only successful in limiting the damage and averting humanity's complete extinction. The resulting sea level rise, tsunamis, and armed conflicts eventually wiped out half of the human population, and had massive geopolitical implications for the nations of the Earth.

I strongly recomend watching the documentary about it.

I love this video so much. The interviewer asks Shapiro to defend his stances and Shapiro responds by calling the interviewer a liberal.

"A Georgia law you support would have women who had a miscarriage face trail for potentialy 30 years in jail. Isn't that a bit harsh?"

"Oh, sorry, I didn't know you were A LIBERAL!"

I remember an interview with a former NASA engineer that said NASA would never be able to do anything near what SpaceX (or any other private company) can do. The reason given is that SpaceX spent billions after billions on what were essentially very expensive fireworks until they finally achieved a breakthrough. A breakthrough that wasn't a guarantee. Even Musk himself had said he would have eventually closed SpaceX if they hadn't achieved something and it would have been a multi billion dollar failure. He, and everyone else really, got very lucky.

Imagine NASA asking taxpayers for another billion dollars after blowing up the last billion with no guarantee this next billion would produce anything but another explosion. How many times would the public foot that bill? Not even once. Not while people don't have healthcare and homelessness and hunger exist. The government can't justify it and that's just how it is. The only way we get space travel, with our current system, is to hope someone with a lot of money is willing to bet it on a breakthrough. It sucks but the problem isn't Musk, it's the system that makes us reliant on billionaires for nice things.

It becomes false advertising when you prove them wrong in court. Few people want to do that so most ads are bullshit. Even if they do get proven wrong, the settlement money is typically peanuts to the impact their ads have on sales. Red Bull paid $13 million for their tagline of "red bull gives you wings" while making several billion a year.

I was a funeral director and got this question a lot.

1. That's not how vikings had funerals. The only Norse who had that type of send off is Baldr, son of Odin, in Norse mythology. Real Norse were cremated or buried. Important people had huge burial mounds since they'd be buried with a lot of their possessions. In reality, if you burned a boat with a body on it, the result would be a charred decaying corpse floating back to land in a day or two. A ship doesn't have enough wood to completly burn a body and bacteria in decaying dead bodies produce gas which causes dead bodies to float.

2. It is possible to "bury at sea" depending on the area. The Canadian government charges a significant amount for a permit to do so and it comes with a lot of conditions like a weighted and sealed casket and being dropped far enough from the shoreline. I've heard they make the process as difficult and costly as possible as a way to discourage the practice. However, there are no restrictions on scattering cremated remains at sea!

"How can you kill that which has no life?"

Bags of sand

How would "here's me stalking your family" ever "win an argument" anyways???

That's why the justice didn't agree. It was a terrible argument and properly dismissed.

The context is irrelevant because nobody wants Ubisoft to fail because they don't make content that caters to them. It's a strawman argument. Does this Director of Monetization want to uplift his competitors? Absolutely not. He would love if all his competitors failed. Yet he gets on his high horse saying we must uplift his corporate venture to extract as much money as possible because we're all in this together??

How can you wish a company to fail

Very easily, actually.