overview for EmperorMollusk
reddit.com EmperorMollusk
EmperorMollusk
What is one piece of non-fictional media that you have watched and has hit your heart strings more than anything else? by sonofalando in AskReddit
[–]EmperorMollusk 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children)
Wrestling with Shadows, the Brett "The Hitman" Hart wrestling documentary.
I'm not even into wrestling, but damnit, this documentary convinced me not only of the artistic integrity of Hart, but of the real conflict he experienced in what is often considered a goofy profession.
Just fantastic and truly heartwrenching.
With The Flash being so fast I presume he would break the sound barrier. Would that make him the loudest superhero of all? by FrenchDip in AskReddit
The loudest of all superheroes would probably be Black Bolt from Marvel's The Inhumans. He can't speak at all because even a whisper would shatter mountains.
ELI5: Why is the Baby Boomer Generation, who were noted for being so liberal in their youth, so conservative now? by qlester in explainlikeimfive
People are almost always liberal in their youth, when they feel like outsiders from the system. As they grow older and become part of that system, they have more invested in it and become more conservative generally.
On the other side, much of the recent Tea Party phenomenon has much to do with conservatives feeling as if they are outside the system again, thus adopting many radical liberal ideas as revolution and rebellion.
This is nothing new and seems pretty commonplace. I'm not suggesting that everyone who is liberal is outside the system or that all conservatism comes from a place of preservation of one's own power. That's far too simple. But, emotionally, it's easy to fall into these generalizations, sweeping as they might be.
Basically, when you're outside the walls, the gilded city within should be brought down. When you're inside, you're invested in protecting it.
Add to this that people tend to settle into their own expectations, and as we get older and the world is more and more different from the one we grew up in, it can seem alien and unfamiliar. And it is human nature to try and "fix" that problem by fighting that change.
I hate it too, as I support homosexuality 100% by InCaseYouMissedThis in AdviceAnimals
There's nothing wrong with this. You can support people's rights to do things you find gross or unpleasant without being hypocritical. I don't particularly get cross-dressing, and find it a little off putting, but it's still a right I fully support.
ELI5: Why in every Zombie movie has no one ever heard of Zombies? It's never an issue with other horror monsters (Vampires, Ghosts, Aliens, etc). So what makes Zombies so special? by lipplog in explainlikeimfive
Probably because zombies aren't very threatening once you understand how to deal with them. Most other classic type monsters are capable of being dangerous even if you know what they are. Silver might help you against a werewolf, but that doesn't prevent it from stalking and killing you like a superpredator. Vampires are usually intelligent and formidable.
Zombies, the classic Living Dead variety anyway, are incredibly stupid and easy to deal with, provided you have the tools. So writers get around that by having our heroes be zombie ignorant.
Note that this isn't always the case, and more writers are giving their characters zombie awareness. It makes things harder, but can be more interesting if done well.
Well since he is Reddit's poster boy, I'm bound to get some hate, but god does that grind my gears by [deleted] in AdviceAnimals
Ah, well, I could jump into the argument with you, but there's probably little point to it. What you consider dogmatic is simply a scientifically sound theory that you disagree with. But that's your call.
Won't trouble you any more then.
You aren't angry because you think evolution is dogmatic, are you? If so, well, there's not much to talk about. Just curious.
Once again, I find your assumptions faulty. We have tons of great scientists and thinkers working today. Also, Tesla in his time was subject to much ridicule and dogmatic opposition, so you're kind of contradicting yourself there. Dogmatic persecution doesn't prevent great thinkers from rising. It just makes it more difficult.
Also, there's no question the internet is full of trolls and naysayers. But these are nothing new. They're ability to voice their opinions on a public forum is new. But do you honestly think mainstream science gives a damn what people on Reddit say? Is groundbreaking research being stifled because I have the power of a downvote?
I'm afraid your worldview is rather myopic, my friend.
[–]EmperorMollusk 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children)
Again, this attitude astounds me. Knowing how an illusion is performed might change the way you perceive the trick, but it should give you an appreciation of the skill and effort required to perform the illusion.
You are reveling in ignorance, and that is absurd and frightening to me. Thank goodness not everyone shares that view because if they did we'd still be in the stone age.
You're example of music struck very close to home. One of the most profound and beautiful moments of my life was listening to a radio program about the nature of music and how it affects the brain. Rather than diminishing my enjoyment, it expanded it a thousandfold.
But there's probably no way to possible relate to each other on this issue. Or probably any other. I only wish you luck in your quest for ignorance, as bizarre as it seems to me.
[–]EmperorMollusk 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children)
Do you believe this is anything new? Hero worship and dogmatism are universal, and have been with us forever. The notion that they're somehow worse in science at this moment in time is absurd.
Though I'm beginning to suspect that this isn't really about science in general but the typical windmills a lot of folks tilt against to defend their point of view.
That is simply beyond my ability to grasp. So what if music is vibrations in the air and taste is neurological impulses? How can that possibly diminish your enjoyment of these things?
You're mistaking ignorance for immersion, and that's a real shame.
Science, like any institution, has its problems with dogmatism. That's nothing new. There's good evidence that scientific advancements come from the passing of the torch, as older generations pass on, taking their old ideas with them, opening up the newer generation to bring in fresh ideas. This is the way it's always been and probably will always be.
And I think it's a stretch to label Tyson dogmatic.
[–]EmperorMollusk 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children)
Yes, just as Newton unmade the beauty of the rainbow via understanding the prism.
What a silly statement. It only makes sense if you assume wonder and beauty require ignorance.
I do not agree with what he said, but I would fight for his right to say it. by They_wont_find_me in AdviceAnimals
It's really quite astounding the number of people who don't seem to understand what Free Speech means, what Constitutional (or Unconstitutional) means, and that sports teams are not really owned, but licensed.
Has anyone noticed that people have gotten meaner toward one another over the years? by [deleted] in AskReddit
No offense, but what do you mean by this?
Considering the brutality of history, it's safer to say we've become nicer to each other, more open, and more accepting. This isn't saying that we are very nice now, but historically, we are much more polite and concerned with each other than we have been.
My girlfriend's thoughts on my hard work getting everything set up. by dfordoctor in AdviceAnimals
I'm picturing a universe where people could make their own surprise birthday party plans, then be hypnotized into forgetting them but still subconsciously remember that they needed to be somewhere "unimportant" for the party.
Well, it's tricky, isn't it?
I wouldn't appreciate a surprise party I didn't get a chance to attend, and I would definitely be annoyed that the people who were planning it didn't inform me.
But I've already made it perfectly clear to my friends and family how I feel about surprise parties, so they really have no excuse to try and spring one on me.
Not to take her side, but isn't that the innate danger of setting up a surprise party? That's why I've never understood doing it.
A friend of mine was once late to her surprise birthday party for this exact reason.
i hate being called a racist for my different view points by fundie_man in AdviceAnimals
It's a complicated question, but, yeah, it's your choice. At the worst, you're being shallow, but, hey, we're all shallow.
On the other hand, I can see why it gets confusing. I haven't met many people with this issue who didn't have some racist baggage. Not that I'm accusing you of this because I don't know you, and choosing not to date a person of a different race isn't innately racist. Any more than choosing to date a person with blonde hair or only tall people makes someone a bad person.
Unless your reason is to preserve racial purity. Then you're racist.
Otherwise, you're just a person with a physical preference, as nearly all of us are.
How could natural selection bring about the evolution of wings? by [deleted] in askscience
Well, I'm not an expert, so I'm sure someone will come along to correct any mistakes I made, but having read several books on the subject (therefore, making me an internet "expert"), I will say your question is flawed because it isn't breaking it down to small enough steps.
Feathers are actually useful for more than flight, capable of insulating like fur.
Wings are specialized limbs, and its highly likely they started out as merely forelimbs with a bit of extra skin, allowing for gliding. Sure, it was mostly likely very minimal, but if an animal falls and a bit of extra skin on its limbs allows it to survive the fall, it has an evolutionary advantage.
Low body mass ISN'T a disadvantage. In fact, in the right circumstances, it's quite the opposite. The extinction of the dinosaurs and the rise of mammals came about because the dinosaurs size worked against them. Smaller mammals could survive on less and could find shelter in places larger dinosaurs couldn't.
As for the light bones, it could be something as simple as a lighter animal uses less energy, hence, it would have an advantage over other animals in terms of long term survival. This is the prevailing theory of why humans are bipedal. It is a more efficient form of mobility.
The problem with your question is that you're assuming (accidentally or not) that the steps that lead to flight are all intended to lead to flight. This would be like assuming humans are bipedal because we were attempting to evolve to use our hands. True, bipedal transition allowed that, but it wasn't the intent.
One of the biggest points about evolution is that advantages are almost always small and seemingly insignificant. It's only in the long term that they become noticeable due to amplification via natural selection.
Another mistake is assuming that "survival of the fittest" means hardiness, physical power, or strength. In fact, natural selection will often select for traits that would, on the surface, seem like a disadvantage, but are actually beneficial. Not that it's actively choosing (it's not an intelligent force) but it's merely a question of survival and reproduction.
So, yes, in the right circumstances, an animal might easily be born small and seemingly more vulnerable to its "hardier" parents, but then the environment shifts and strengths can become weaknesses and vice versa.
Also, there are plenty of flightless birds which function just fine and even thrive, thus an animal can evolve a lot of the features of flying birds and still function. Penguins have many of the features of flying birds. As do ostriches. Neither have suffered because of it.
Chickens, turkeys, etc. are all flightless birds who manage to survive just fine.
I'm going to get crucified for this. by furyofsound in AdviceAnimals
Humor is subjective, although I sometimes think that equating "funny" with "laughter" can be a mistake. There are many clever things that I find amusing, but don't make me fall over laughing.
I love classic screwball comedies, for example, and rarely do they make me laugh out loud, aside from a wry chuckle now and then.
But there's nothing wrong with not finding something funny. Humor is one of the most subjective of qualities.
This is true. Extremism, like all things, isn't always black and white. Good point.
I don't wonder at it at all. It's because people like Limbaugh have succeeded in making Feminism a negative word. I'm part of culture. I am influenced by it.
As for the term Feminazi, it's a perfect example of someone falsely conflating a reasonable position with an extremist position. That the term isn't taken as an immediate sign that the user is unfairly hostile toward feminism in general is a mystery. Other than everyone loves to compare any philosophy they don't like to the Nazis here in America.
Which, really, is ridiculous on all sides.
Yeah, whoops. Inexplicably linked is a whole other thing.
π Rendered by PID 71956 on app-766 at 2018-01-17 01:30:39.559956+00:00 running 2953a74 country code: US.
overview for EmperorMollusk
reddit.com EmperorMollusk
EmperorMollusk
What is one piece of non-fictional media that you have watched and has hit your heart strings more than anything else? by sonofalando in AskReddit
[–]EmperorMollusk 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children)
Wrestling with Shadows, the Brett "The Hitman" Hart wrestling documentary.
I'm not even into wrestling, but damnit, this documentary convinced me not only of the artistic integrity of Hart, but of the real conflict he experienced in what is often considered a goofy profession.
Just fantastic and truly heartwrenching.
With The Flash being so fast I presume he would break the sound barrier. Would that make him the loudest superhero of all? by FrenchDip in AskReddit
The loudest of all superheroes would probably be Black Bolt from Marvel's The Inhumans. He can't speak at all because even a whisper would shatter mountains.
ELI5: Why is the Baby Boomer Generation, who were noted for being so liberal in their youth, so conservative now? by qlester in explainlikeimfive
People are almost always liberal in their youth, when they feel like outsiders from the system. As they grow older and become part of that system, they have more invested in it and become more conservative generally.
On the other side, much of the recent Tea Party phenomenon has much to do with conservatives feeling as if they are outside the system again, thus adopting many radical liberal ideas as revolution and rebellion.
This is nothing new and seems pretty commonplace. I'm not suggesting that everyone who is liberal is outside the system or that all conservatism comes from a place of preservation of one's own power. That's far too simple. But, emotionally, it's easy to fall into these generalizations, sweeping as they might be.
Basically, when you're outside the walls, the gilded city within should be brought down. When you're inside, you're invested in protecting it.
Add to this that people tend to settle into their own expectations, and as we get older and the world is more and more different from the one we grew up in, it can seem alien and unfamiliar. And it is human nature to try and "fix" that problem by fighting that change.
I hate it too, as I support homosexuality 100% by InCaseYouMissedThis in AdviceAnimals
There's nothing wrong with this. You can support people's rights to do things you find gross or unpleasant without being hypocritical. I don't particularly get cross-dressing, and find it a little off putting, but it's still a right I fully support.
ELI5: Why in every Zombie movie has no one ever heard of Zombies? It's never an issue with other horror monsters (Vampires, Ghosts, Aliens, etc). So what makes Zombies so special? by lipplog in explainlikeimfive
Probably because zombies aren't very threatening once you understand how to deal with them. Most other classic type monsters are capable of being dangerous even if you know what they are. Silver might help you against a werewolf, but that doesn't prevent it from stalking and killing you like a superpredator. Vampires are usually intelligent and formidable.
Zombies, the classic Living Dead variety anyway, are incredibly stupid and easy to deal with, provided you have the tools. So writers get around that by having our heroes be zombie ignorant.
Note that this isn't always the case, and more writers are giving their characters zombie awareness. It makes things harder, but can be more interesting if done well.
Well since he is Reddit's poster boy, I'm bound to get some hate, but god does that grind my gears by [deleted] in AdviceAnimals
Ah, well, I could jump into the argument with you, but there's probably little point to it. What you consider dogmatic is simply a scientifically sound theory that you disagree with. But that's your call.
Won't trouble you any more then.
You aren't angry because you think evolution is dogmatic, are you? If so, well, there's not much to talk about. Just curious.
Once again, I find your assumptions faulty. We have tons of great scientists and thinkers working today. Also, Tesla in his time was subject to much ridicule and dogmatic opposition, so you're kind of contradicting yourself there. Dogmatic persecution doesn't prevent great thinkers from rising. It just makes it more difficult.
Also, there's no question the internet is full of trolls and naysayers. But these are nothing new. They're ability to voice their opinions on a public forum is new. But do you honestly think mainstream science gives a damn what people on Reddit say? Is groundbreaking research being stifled because I have the power of a downvote?
I'm afraid your worldview is rather myopic, my friend.
[–]EmperorMollusk 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children)
Again, this attitude astounds me. Knowing how an illusion is performed might change the way you perceive the trick, but it should give you an appreciation of the skill and effort required to perform the illusion.
You are reveling in ignorance, and that is absurd and frightening to me. Thank goodness not everyone shares that view because if they did we'd still be in the stone age.
You're example of music struck very close to home. One of the most profound and beautiful moments of my life was listening to a radio program about the nature of music and how it affects the brain. Rather than diminishing my enjoyment, it expanded it a thousandfold.
But there's probably no way to possible relate to each other on this issue. Or probably any other. I only wish you luck in your quest for ignorance, as bizarre as it seems to me.
[–]EmperorMollusk 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children)
Do you believe this is anything new? Hero worship and dogmatism are universal, and have been with us forever. The notion that they're somehow worse in science at this moment in time is absurd.
Though I'm beginning to suspect that this isn't really about science in general but the typical windmills a lot of folks tilt against to defend their point of view.
That is simply beyond my ability to grasp. So what if music is vibrations in the air and taste is neurological impulses? How can that possibly diminish your enjoyment of these things?
You're mistaking ignorance for immersion, and that's a real shame.
Science, like any institution, has its problems with dogmatism. That's nothing new. There's good evidence that scientific advancements come from the passing of the torch, as older generations pass on, taking their old ideas with them, opening up the newer generation to bring in fresh ideas. This is the way it's always been and probably will always be.
And I think it's a stretch to label Tyson dogmatic.
[–]EmperorMollusk 5 poi
nts6 points7 points 3 years ago (0 children)
Yes, just as Newton unmade the beauty of the rainbow via understanding the prism.
What a silly statement. It only makes sense if you assume wonder and beauty require ignorance.
I do not agree with what he said, but I would fight for his right to say it. by They_wont_find_me in AdviceAnimals
It's really quite astounding the number of people who don't seem to understand what Free Speech means, what Constitutional (or Unconstitutional) means, and that sports teams are not really owned, but licensed.
Has anyone noticed that people have gotten meaner toward one another over the years? by [deleted] in AskReddit
No offense, but what do you mean by this?
Considering the brutality of history, it's safer to say we've become nicer to each other, more open, and more accepting. This isn't saying that we are very nice now, but historically, we are much more polite and concerned with each other than we have been.
My girlfriend's thoughts on my hard work getting everything set up. by dfordoctor in AdviceAnimals
I'm picturing a universe where people could make their own surprise birthday party plans, then be hypnotized into forgetting them but still subconsciously remember that they needed to be somewhere "unimportant" for the party.
Well, it's tricky, isn't it?
I wouldn't appreciate a surprise party I didn't get a chance to attend, and I would definitely be annoyed that the people who were planning it didn't inform me.
But I've already made it perfectly clear to my friends and family how I feel about surprise parties, so they really have no excuse to try and spring one on me.
Not to take her side, but isn't that the innate danger of setting up a surprise party? That's why I've never understood doing it.
A friend of mine was once late to her surprise birthday party for this exact reason.
i hate being called a racist for my different view points by fundie_man in AdviceAnimals
It's a complicated question, but, yeah, it's your choice. At the worst, you're being shallow, but, hey, we're all shallow.
On the other hand, I can see why it gets confusing. I haven't met many people with this issue who didn't have some racist baggage. Not that I'm accusing you of this because I don't know you, and choosing not to date a person of a different race isn't innately racist. Any more than choosing to date a person with blonde hair or only tall people makes someone a bad person.
Unless your reason is to preserve racial purity. Then you're racist.
Otherwise, you're just a person with a physical preference, as nearly all of us are.
How could natural selection bring about the evolution of wings? by [deleted] in askscience
Well, I'm not an expert, so I'm sure someone will come along to correct any mistakes I made, but having read several books on the subject (therefore, making me an internet "expert"), I will say your question is flawed because it isn't breaking it down to small enough steps.
Feathers are actually useful for more than flight, capable of insulating like fur.
Wings are specialized limbs, and its highly likely they started out as merely forelimbs with a bit of extra skin, allowing for gliding. Sure, it was mostly likely very minimal, but if an animal falls and a bit of extra skin on its limbs allows it to survive the fall, it has an evolutionary advantage.
Low body mass ISN'T a disadvantage. In fact, in the right circumstances, it's quite the opposite. The extinction of the dinosaurs and the rise of mammals came about because the dinosaurs size worked against them. Smaller mammals could survive on less and could find shelter in places larger dinosaurs couldn't.
As for the light bones, it could be something as simple as a lighter animal uses less energy, hence, it would have an advantage over other animals in terms of long term survival. This is the prevailing theory of why humans are bipedal. It is a more efficient form of mobility.
The problem with your question is that you're assuming (accidentally or not) that the steps that lead to flight are all intended to lead to flight. This would be like assuming humans are bipedal because we were attempting to evolve to use our hands. True, bipedal transition allowed that, but it wasn't the intent.
One of the biggest points about evolution is that advantages are almost always small and seemingly insignificant. It's only in the long term that they become noticeable due to amplification via natural selection.
Another mistake is assuming that "survival of the fittest" means hardiness, physical power, or strength. In fact, natural selection will often select for traits that would, on the surface, seem like a disadvantage, but are actually beneficial. Not that it's actively choosing (it's not an intelligent force) but it's merely a question of survival and reproduction.
So, yes, in the right circumstances, an animal might easily be born small and seemingly more vulnerable to its "hardier" parents, but then the environment shifts and strengths can become weaknesses and vice versa.
Also, there are plenty of flightless birds which function just fine and even thrive, thus an animal can evolve a lot of the features of flying birds and still function. Penguins have many of the features of flying birds. As do ostriches. Neither have suffered because of it.
Chickens, turkeys, etc. are all flightless birds who manage to survive just fine.
I'm going to get crucified for this. by furyofsound in AdviceAnimals
Humor is subjective, although I sometimes think that equating "funny" with "laughter" can be a mistake. There are many clever things that I find amusing, but don't make me fall over laughing.
I love classic screwball comedies, for example, and rarely do they make me laugh out loud, aside from a wry chuckle now and then.
But there's nothing wrong with not finding something funny. Humor is one of the most subjective of qualities.
This is true. Extremism, like all things, isn't always black and white. Good point.
I don't wonder at it at all. It's because people like Limbaugh have succeeded in making Feminism a negative word. I'm part of culture. I am influenced by it.
As for the term Feminazi, it's a perfect example of someone falsely conflating a reasonable position with an extremist position. That the term isn't taken as an immediate sign that the user is unfairly hostile toward feminism in general is a mystery. Other than everyone loves to compare any philosophy they don't like to the Nazis here in America.
Which, really, is ridiculous on all sides.
Yeah, whoops. Inexplicably linked is a whole other thing.
π Rendered by PID 71956 on app-766 at 2018-01-17 01:30:39.559956+00:00 running 2953a74 country code: US.