• 2 Posts
  • 1.64K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 13th, 2023

help-circle

  • Did you watch the whole interview or read it? There is no mistake. He thinks that on his knuckles was “M S 1 3” in Arial font in real life. The interviewer tried to give him the out, said that the tattoo could be interpreted that way, and then tried to move on. But Trump doubled down multiple times and said that there is no interpretation. That the literal letters and numbers were tattooed on him. So, there is no ambiguity to what Trump is insisting is true. You can question whether he is actually stupid enough to believe that (he is), or just thinks that his followers and the media are stupid enough to believe it (he does), but there is no longer any question as to whether Trump is claiming that the literal letters are tattooed on him. He said so unequivocally.


  • The idea is that theories have considerable evidence and are consistent with all testing done up to that point. (Warning: I AM NOT SUGGESTING THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE. IT IS A HYPOTHETICAL ONLY) But what if we found out tomorrow that if you put bacteria in an environment with a specific magnetic field, they no longer caused disease and they end up finding out that bacteria poop has magnetize structures of the cell and cause diseases. That antibiotics have the magnetized structures with the opposite polarity that counteract the bacteria poop. Or some shit like that. This would contradict our current understanding of germ theory and it would be proven to be wrong or at least incomplete.

    That is why theories are not “proven” because they are ALWAYS open to better explanation if one can be provided. That being said, it is highly unlikely that any well established, defined and tested theory will ever be “disproven” wholecloth, becuase it has always been consistent with observations. Germs are real, disease is clearly related to them in some way, specific germs cause specific reactions in our bodies, etc. But we could always be partially wrong about something, or have an incomplete explanation.

    EDIT: for you people down voting, you know you are defending the conclusions of science while misunderstanding the very nature of the scientific method. Science is not dogma. It is a method of continuous improvement. If evidence contradicts current understanding, science learns from it and adapts accordingly. That is what makes Science trustworthy, it does not put conclusion before the evidence. Don’t make that same mistake.



  • The etymology that was in question there in your excerpt was that it came from indigenous word Nahautl mallihuan. But the only suggestion of this is from a biased source. In other words it is unlikely that the word predates Spanish in Mexico. I didn’t claim that. I said that the word comes from Mexican Spanish.

    If you kept reading, you would see:

    The word “marijuana” as we know it today did not appear until 1846 in Farmacopea Mexicana, though it was spelled “mariguana”. In most following instances, the word was spelled marihuana.[21][22]

    Also, btw, I’m not arguing in favor of the supposed translation of the tattoo, I’m just not pretending that Spanish speakers don’t call it Marijuana when the word is originally Spanish and they definitely still do call it that. Name me a word in English that isn’t borrowed from Spanish that has a J that sounds like an H. Jalapeño, Mojito, Jicama… all Spanish words originally. Same with Marijuana.