"But, of course, having created ants, the crown and supreme achievement of her work, nature could be trusted to provide for them; and so she had also created man."
-Solenopsis Invicta (invasive fire ant) Queen explaining why humans exist.
2/
"But, of course, having created ants, the crown and supreme achievement of her work, nature could be trusted to provide for them; and so she had also created man."
-Solenopsis Invicta (invasive fire ant) Queen explaining why humans exist.
2/
WHO told me to read "Consider Her Ways" by Frederick Philip Grove? Someone on here told me about this book...
This books is:
* amazing
* a little bonkers, can't believe it's real
* hilarious ... wall to wall ant jokes
Let me share a passage:
"She went so far as to assert that, if nature had not given man to ants, ants would, at least in these parts, have had to invent or to breed something much resembling man in order to subsist in safety." 1/
I can't see the post this is replying to, can you link it? This happens from time to time on here and I don't know why exactly.
*brrrup*
*desperate scrambling*
I think it's important to remember that you can know something is a bad idea even if you can't make sense of the motivations of the people trying to do it.
Because it's possible their motivations make no sense. No one can explain this to me sufficiently. It's a bad idea.
It's bad that it even is "an idea" it's not worth thinking about.
Everyone wants to be a little big man instead of actually doing amazing big things. The lack of imagination depresses me.
I have a friend who used to work in commodities and he says the oil companies are not interested in Venezuela now. They were wary because of the government, but now they are MORE wary because it's less stable.
Why can't they just do that now?
There is a theory that this move is designed to break up NATO.
I thought that was a little far fetched at first, NATO is really good for the US, it's like the birthday boy throwing a tantrum.
But some conservatives have a deep seated fear of "world government." So maybe that's it? Basically these are the guys who find it galling that there are notions like "international law" or "human rights" however unevenly applied.
Can someone explain to me what Trump and the US Government or companies would be able to do if they "had Greenland" that they can't do right now?
Like, what are we talking about? It's going to be cold Puerto Rico? I'd say "well they could set up a military base" ... but we have that already?
Is this about mineral or drilling rights or something?
It's of course offensive nonsense, but I don't even get the point. And no one asks them.
What do you get?
The tech was so cool. Flawed to a degree but still impressive.
But I am a sucker for a pair of big turbines.
I will add it to #fediverseTV
The Chernobyl nuclear disaster.
You can watch #FediverseTV (The pretty good content slush pool.) --or add stuff to it.
I'm sorry that it is youTube.
INVITE LINK: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTh3hv32NLhrPBgOXrUgwp6BQaC94lt9n&jct=tpuRKVQZ6Rj6p6iI14weNQ
OK there is a HUGE debate about every aspect of how the disaster went down and it's really fascinating and I have no idea who is right.
So.
You know how there are train foamers?
They have *nothing* on the Chernobyl foamers.
They found this Russian language forum with all the old engineers beefing with each other and translated it. They have simulations of everything.
The rebuilt ... THE TOY TANK ROVER.
I, of course am not a foamer for anything. I'm very normal about all topics.