The Hadfield vent might work though, since it creates a directional pressure differential. It actually did work to remove the ball of contaminated water from Chris’s eyes.

Yeah, Canadian astronaut Chris Hadfield had something in his eyes during an EVA causing them to fill up with contaminated tears, essentially blinding him. Houston’s solution was for him to vent his helmet and suck the tears out into space.

Chris Hadfield was told by Houston to vent his helmet when his eyes were blinded by contaminated tears on an EVA. I assume you could do something similar here.

Then radioactive water did leak into the ocean though. Surely according to the historic ruling of US v. Sharknado, that must count, right?

Seriously, what is up with these downvotes?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_nuclear_disaster

This is just a real thing that happened. It’s not even political…. I think. Are people not reading the 10 years part and just assuming it’s some jab about the bombs?

Stories like this are exactly why you should seek treatment. You can treat it early, or let it devolve to a state where someone calls the cops, and then you’re at their mercy.

Enter Shikari. Every record is good, different than the one before, and undeniably Shikari.

Even in your commentary there’s political context. What makes him seem determined and terrifying? His shirtless striding and horse riding skills or his determined and terrifying acts against his own people and those in Ukraine. To say that a painting depicting Putin as a monstrous figure in the year 2023 is NOT political is just boring and somehow pedantic. Yes not all art is political all the time, but a painting of a zombified Putin set against an apocalyptic landscape released during a war he started is not political? Really?

Also, saying Putin is flattered here is clearly sarcasm. The man has puncture wounds in his chest. Does we really always need the /s?

I was trying to say that real life Putin looks gross and use something like litotes or hyperbole to ironically say that he looks good here. Do you honestly think any rational human would look at this art and go, “Dang! He looks great!”? It’s an insult. The man, like every other authoritarian, is obsessed with his appearance. It brings a modicum of joy to know that he would be even a little annoyed by comments about his looks.

Either the people downvoting me can’t tell that I’m making fun of Putin, don’t like that I’m making fun of Putin, or actively support him. So I guess downvote away? He’s an authoritarian who’s always been obsessed with his image. Fuck him, his policies, and anyone who supports him.

He looks good here, compared to how he looks now. What’s the point in a flattering portrait? I mean, this is damn sexy compared to how he actually looks.

1. Are you drawing a distinction between “desire” and rights? That might be an important one.

2. I love the insinuation that indigenous tribes are the same as suburban nimbys. Why don’t we just put wind farms on land that’s already been zoned away from indigenous populations? We have plenty of those here in Ohio and they haven’t harmed wildlife or farming efforts. People still act like they do, but again, not a lot of evidence.

Yes. Because of my mean Reddit comments, all of these monumental gains we’re making to curb climate change will surely be stymied.

“This is why your father slapped you.” Is this like some sort of idiom that I’m ignorant of? Or are you using my familial abuse as a witty retort? What a strange thing to say to someone, even anonymously.

Because I feel no need to be polite to people who consider other groups of people less human than I do, consider planet scale phenomena to be trivialities, and consider everyone else to be guilty of the heinous misdeeds they perpetrate. My arrogance will not change facts. My conceit will not change the fact that one side tends to prioritize logic, fact, and compassion. I have no patience, and honestly no sympathy, for a group of people who deny science and humanity on a daily basis and then have the gall to call me condescending. Their every remark is how they know better than the experts. They use condescension like other artists use oils. They constantly point out which groups are coming for them because they’re so jealous and threatened by how great they are. If it’s unclear, I’m talking about the right. Condescending enough for you?

Not sure what “this” is or how someone would use “this” against me and for what reason. I’m providing context to an admittedly unenlightened comment from an admittedly checked-out human being on an admittedly suffering planet. Your irreverence holds as much weight and impact as any one of the tiny internet comments we’ve traded back and forth, yet it is still important to note that the next generation has not given up, nearly as much as either of us, on the sick planet with which we are burdening them while we retreat to the back halves of our lives here. If we’re going to do this to them, we can at least pretend that we cared or tried to help in even the smallest way. Otherwise, I’m sure they will cherish your sardonic wit, as that’s how you seem to want to be remembered. Your aloofness is not noble, though I do understand the mental/emotional self-preservation that it comes from.

This one isn’t even hard to think of with nuance. It’s actually right in line with what Thunberg usually espouses: Protect the environment. Usually renewable energy sources are a means to that end. In this particular instance, this particular renewable effort doesn’t achieve that goal, so don’t do it. Unfortunately, people like u/hamsamith will attempt to use it as a gotcha, without realizing that it both undermines their empty efforts at “discourse” (by showing that they don’t read the sources and don’t fully understand the issue) and strengthens Thunberg’s position by showing that she is nuanced in her message and efforts by actually considering the people and environments that renewables affect directly.

Nuance can be difficult sometimes. Wind farms are good for the environment because they can reduce a country’s use of fossil fuels, which lead to pollution in the air and all that comes with it, especially warming characteristics. However, if a wind farm causes harm to a wildlife population that is essential to the lifestyle of an indigenous population, then it doesn’t seem to help the environment that much, does it? So, if we instead put it somewhere where it doesn’t have this effect, it should provide a net good, as is the purpose of building wind farms in the first place. “We” still think wind farms are generally good, because “we” can think situationally and not treat every scenario as a black and white issue. “We” are capable of reading articles and allowing new evidence to enter our brains and modify our conclusions to be more accurate.

Yes. You’re right. Men are very oppressed and constantly assaulted by words.

It’s weird to see comments like this on an article about an athlete being harangued for not looking like people think he’s supposed to based on his heritage. In short: Holy shit, dude.

Edit: your comment (while I assume it’s a joke) is so close to “are you two related? You’re both black and Asian,” wait… that is your comment. Holy shit, dude.

“Pics of his Asian father?”

Holy shit, dude.

Or just an outdated an sexist way of referring to a woman? Or both!