![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/gWmVEUZ94Z.png)
First of all, [citation needed]. Second, even if it is, a good message is being sent.
First of all, [citation needed]. Second, even if it is, a good message is being sent.
If that is true, the complaint should be against synagogues being exempt, not against churches being asked to pay up.
Wikipedia (Jan 2001, so barely squeaked in)
now they start targeting Christians
By asking religious bodies to pay tax? Why do religious organisations get tax exemptions anyway?
I think they’re trolling. In reality, it could mean they have a justification to attack / sieze any Canadian ships that stray into the Persian Gulf. But that would be a pretty huge provocation, so it’s unlikely.
Apes are Old World monkeys.
ACs are not being provided to reduce emissions. Everyone is being asked to accept an equal handicap, so that the world does not become even hotter in the coming years. It’s largely symbolic, I agree, but I suppose kicking out a team that prioritises its medal tally over the climate crisis would send an even stronger signal.
ACs are not being provided to reduce emissions. Most teams seem to be respecting this decision.
science has also shown that environments devoid of pathogens tend to produce people with allergies and autoimmune disorders
It’s actually the other way around, with viral infections being one of many causes of autoimmune diseases.
I think they’re only including mainstream models.
It’s to fight the honkai when they start appearing in our universe. (Jokes aside, a company that needs to run a lot of servers would be interested in cheap energy.)
The organisers should just cut their power supply. Or disqualify the team for trying to gain an unfair advantage.
Oh definitely. I was just hoping they’d spend those billions on busses, metros and, yes, HSR, instead of on EVs. Still, they’re ahead of most countries as it is.
Investment in public transport would have been better, but it’s not nothing. Hope other countries follow suit.
I can think of four possible reasons:-
It works on my system - We are shaped by our experiences. To someone who had their life turned around by a religious order (or a religious individual), it would make sense to follow their teachings.
Opium of the masses - Life is filled with suffering. It is nice to imagine that there is someone looking out for you. An afterlife free of suffering is even better.
Just following orders - If you want to do something, but don’t think your community will support you, it is easier if you say ‘god told me to do it’. It might also make it easier to justify the action to yourself.
Church of England - You don’t care much either way, but it’s too much of a hassle to leave. Plus meeting your friends and neighbours every week is fun.
At least you don’t expect them to undergo two training arcs, beat a kaiju in single combat and h*ld h*nds with their crush to graduate.
If all scientific knowledge were to suddenly disappear and we were to start from square one, it would all reappear exactly like it is.
Three competing theories of evolution arose, independently, in our world - one from British and European scientists studying the tropics, another from Russian and US scientists studying Siberia and northern North America, and a third by a Japanese scientist studying statistics and genetics. While the current consensus in evolutionary biology is that all three are true (at different timescales), the vast majority of people (and even other scientists) only know the first. This is partly because Darwin got there first, and partly because a lot of powerful people benefit from spreading social Darwinist woo.
Ironically, in a post-apocalyptic world, the powers that be would probably support the symbiotic theory, with Darwinism frowned upon as selfish individualism.
however the process of science will ensure that the truth comes to light eventually.
As Keynes said, in the long term we are all dead. Science is probably the best tool we currently have to find the truth (assuming there is a truth), but it is always important to remember that it is produced by humans, funded by interests and (mostly, though this is changing) published by for-profit journals. When reading a paper, always read the conflict of interest and funding details, and hope the authors are being honest.
The majority of the antibiotics we produce are given to animals in factory farms, at doses so high they shit out the bulk of it. This contaminates the soil, streams and lakes with antibiotics, resulting in resistant bacteria. The best part? Antibiotics are sometimes given to healthy animals to fatten them up. (This last bit is illegal in the EU and now China also.)
The emissions saved from removing a few hundred ACs are negligible. But the message it sends to the millions watching the Olympics is significant. Which, again, is why I am hoping there will be at least some symbolic action against rule-breakers - it will start a conversation about the need to regulate / ban ACs.