Cicadas can sexually transmit a fungus that will infect the new host, pump it chock full of amphetamins and lets it run on a no-sleep-all-action hypersexual rampage where the fungus completely replaces the sexual organs of the cicada so when it has sex with another one that other will become infected and do the same?
For some definitions of noses.
Do they have a weird bump over their mouth in the center of their face? Some do yes.
Do they inhale or exhale with it? No.
Has it got anything to do with their sense of smell? Also no.
What do they use it for? Well functionally it's more of an upper lip than a nose.
How do they smell? Awful. But also they use the chemorezeptors in their antennae to smell/taste the air.
It's three fedoras, looked at from the top!
Thank you for making me look, but fuck you for not telling me, it took ages of staring at my screen before I got what was actually depicted.
The word "disinfornation" came from the press. The authors stated it "has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation", adding:
We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement—just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.
Politico (owned btw. by german far right Axel Springer LLC, Germanys Fox News) distorted the meaning of the letter:
There was message distortion. All we were doing was raising a yellow flag that this could be Russian disinformation. Politico deliberately distorted what we said. It was clear in paragraph five
Theistic Satanism, otherwise referred to as religious Satanism, spiritual Satanism, or traditional Satanism,[2] is an umbrella term for religious groups that consider Satan, the Devil, to objectively exist as a deity, supernatural entity, or spiritual being worthy of worship or reverence, whom individuals may contact and convene with, in contrast to the atheistic archetype, metaphor, or symbol found in LaVeyan Satanism.
The Satanic Bible is LaVeyan Satanism and as a product of the 20th century very much more modern than the "traditional Satanism" of de Sade and Huysman in the 19th century.
LaVeyan Satanism is still much more on the "spiritual" side of things than, for example the explicitly atheistic, sceptic and rational Satanic Temple, but both fall under the umbrella of the more modern, non-theistic understanding of Satanism. While a more historical form definetly existed, even if it wasn't widely practiced.
In Christian Satanism the Devil exists and is being worshipped. This is "classical" or "theist" Satanism where there is a belief in the existence of Satan.
Contrast that with modern atheist Satanism, where the Devil is merely a psychological symbol of rebellion, independence and freedom that serves to trigger theists while also being a representation of revolting against christan authoritarianism and, through the exploitation of rules stemming from theist-political decisionmaking, as a counter to the blatantly unconstitutional abuse of religious freedom laws for the benefit of a single religion.
Republicans won both 2000 and 2016 despite losing the popular vote.
Hmmm... I don't think it is proof either. But it is imho the strongest possible indication of nonexistence.
For me to accept the possible existence of something, the possibility would have to be shown first. And I am at the moment convinced that the existence of anything without interaction with reality is impossible. Because I think existence is defined by interaction with reality.
Everything else would be apart, seperate from reality: not real.
I'm... I'm really conflicted.
It feels like there's ~~:.|:;~~ here, but I can't put my finger on it... has... has the internet conditioned me to look for Loss in every four panel comic?
Bah, if a theoretical agent had any interaction with reality, we should find evidence of some kind of interaction. If we don't then there are three possibilities: 1. It doesn't exist, 2. It doesn't interact with reality. If it doesn't interact with reality, it isn't real in any meaningfull way. If it isn't real, it doesn't exist. 3. We can't find where and how it interacts with reality, in that case it is the ever diminishing god of the gaps.
Your grandma is not (necessarily - I don't know her, she could be trafficking people) a bad person, but her beliefs and that of so many others who also are good (at least they might be) people provide the fertile ground for the growth of an agressive weed. It's not the grounds fault, it could be growing strawberries instead, but right now its existence nourishes a strangling vine that bears poisonous fruit.
We definetly should not poison the ground to kill the weed, though that certainly is a way to get rid of it. But we absolutely need to prevent it from spreading, new fields should not be infected by it and with the exhaution of the old places of growth, we might manage to extinct it.
That's why it is important to keep in mind that your grandma is (most likely) okay to just exist as a believer, but that the beliefs she holds are roots of something, that must not spread.
Ideologie der Utopie ist cool solange man sie sich leisten kann.
"Es kann der Frömmste nicht in Frieden leben, wenn es dem bösen Nachbarn nicht gefällt." hat Schiller sehr zutreffend den Tell sagen lassen. Und da kommen wir halt in den Konflikt zwischen der Utopie und der gelebten Realität. Soldaten abschaffen und Rüstungsindustrie zurückbauen wäre absolut vor zu ziehen, wäre das wie ich leben wollen würde. Aber der Angriff auf die Ukraine ist ein Angriff auf ein demokratisches, unabhängiges Land in Europa und hat vielerlei Auswirkungen.
Auch wenn sie nicht in der EU sind, kann ich es mit meinem Gewissen nicht vereinbaren diese Menschen ihrem Schicksal zu überlassen. Zu sagen "sind nicht unsere Werte, ist nicht unser Problem" funktioniert für mich nicht. Da werden Menschen ermordet, gefoltert, vergewaltigt von einem Aggressor der seine Armee in ein Nachbarland schickt und glaubt damit durch zu kommen. Das darf nicht zur gelebten Realität werden dass wir sowas einfach hinnehmen.
Unsere Freunde in Osteuropa haben davor gewarnt und jetzt natürlich und verständlicherweise wieder viel Angst dass ihnen das genauso passiert. Das Baltikum, Polen, Moldawien, Rumänien, die Slowakei... alle sind sie jetzt alarmiert und die Menschen haben Angst und fühlen sich schutzlos. Wir sind theoretisch in der Lage zu helfen, wir können diesen Menschen ein kleines Bisschen mehr Sicherheit geben, ist es da nicht auch unsere moralische Pflicht das zu tun?