I guess I should have been clearer, maybe that combination leads one to be more susceptible to that kind of condescension.

I hear it about NDT too. I wonder if the combination of fame and science educator combine to a particularly volatile condescension?

I’ve gotten that vibe for the last decade or so, but do you have a particular reason?

Alexandria of Antioch was too lazy to put arms on the Venus de Milo

Some people are wealthy because they provide a valuable, well-paid skill (neurosurgeons, for example). Some people are in positions of power because they sincerely want to make their communities a better place.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s probably more likely to get there through sociopathic greed. But that doesn’t mean they are all horrible people.

Are you talking about specific wealthy, powerful people?

I don’t think night shift Barbie is doing the science part of medicine.

New Apollo 18 lore just dropped

If this is for personal interest, go into it with relatively concrete questions, and then try to answer them.

What makes you think it’s a trap? Seems more like an effort to get you, personally, in and out as quickly as possible

At least they’re pivoting instead of just doing both.

Tramp was a sapient dog, which I think counts

Right, what I’m saying is where do you draw the line at where “in the sun” ends?

What? You didn’t verify anything, you just said you remember being told once. It’s not an obvious fact because it isn’t true, you made it up. It’s not foolish to believe a word means what it means, you can just look up the definition. Are you high or something?

Whoever told you that was incorrect. Literally means the plain textbook definition of the words written, as opposed to euphemism or metaphor. If I say “I would literally die on this hill”, it means that there is an actual large mound of dirt that I am willing to lose my life on.

Any other interpretation is literally incorrect.

I’m thinking about it, and I think they might be right. Sunbeams are a part of the sun, albeit mingled with atmosphere. If they were in direct line of the sun, i could consider them technically, literally, correct.

It all depends on whether you consider an object bathed in the radiance of something to be “in” that thing, but I’m kinda inclined to consider that.

Starship Troopers is not misunderstood satire

I’ve read a lot of Heinlein, and while I don’t think “satire” is quite the right word, I’d consider it more of a thought experiment than sincere belief.

As long as they stay to the right I don’t care that much

I’m fine with language evolving over time, but I reject “literally” being used to mean “figuratively”. Distinguishing figurative from literal is, literally, the word’s one job. Take that away, and the word literally doesn’t mean anything but a generic intensifier. There literally isn’t another word that fulfills that disambiguating purpose, this semantic drift only decreases clarity.

You avoid growing plants because it’s emasculating.

I avoid growing plants because I’m awful at it and it’s cruel.

We are not the same

The typical therapist advice about focusing only on the things you can personally change does not work well on macro issues. Issues that were created by lots of people working together like climate change require a bunch of people working together to fix.

But collaborating with others to address macro problems is something you can personally do.