[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago

Is this a bad thing? Definitely shouldn't be driving during these conditions due to low visibility, high risk of significant damage leading to crash, etc.

[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

I can't speak to that aspect. But I firmly believe that if our military planned and carried out this strike, then we had very good evidence that their bunkers were at a depth these ordinance could reach.

[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

I was suspicious of that as well, but I'm not knowledgeable enough on that subject to speak on it, so didn't include it. But I doubt any country can build that extensive of a nuclear factory in so few years.

[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

That's what they want you to think, but we have no evidence to either direction. And I doubt we will ever have a definitive answer.

[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 216 points 6 days ago

Holy nothing burger, Batman!

First off, this article is from 2022, re-released to farm clicks from the current hype cycle.

Secondly, this is conjecture on top of conjecture. They discuss that we can't know the current damage from satellite, and Iran down plays the damage. Then they go on to say "concrete is strong and can be stronger".

Articles like this annoy me. It's all based on lots of unsubstantiated claims, and then one guy's theoretical research. We don't know the strength of the bombs. We don't know the strength of Iran's bunkers. We don't know how much damage was done. None of this has changed. I doubt we'll ever really know. But throw whatever political spin on it you want, and now you've got a click worthy news article.

[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 77 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

It's piss. Squirting is pissing. That's been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Will link when I find the research I came across a while ago.

Edit: this study is about as good as we're going to get on this topic, shows there is definitely a lot of urine.

[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 83 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Congress says

Congress is concerned

Congress warns

It is literally your job to prevent these concerns. Stop talking and do something. The old fucks who refuse to leave office have been collecting paychecks while sitting back and doing nothing, progressively giving away their power to the executive branch for the past ~20 years. Now they're concerned? Too little, too late. Either step up (but watch out for broken hips) or get out of the way.

[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 47 points 5 months ago

the airline wants to force passengers to use their app so they can sell customer data and sell ads

That's a bingo

[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 221 points 5 months ago

Hi gang! Doctor here, trained at and still work at the local "Rectal Foreign Body Center of Excellence", so I feel somewhat qualified to give my professional opinion.

Yes, nothing without a flared base should be used in this fashion. BUT, there's pretty much no risk for harm here. Mechanical obstruction is unlikely because, as OP says, it'll get mushy and get pooped out. Bananas aren't much of an irritant like a citrus fruit, so not much risk for chemical damage. Someone else said there might be a risk of potassium overdose, but not really. The rectum does absorb, but not as much as the stomach. So while some potassium will be absorbed, this is at worst equivalent to eating the same number of bananas. Which won't harm you.

So not a big risk here. That being said, flared bases, everyone!

[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 73 points 5 months ago

As with every time this is posted, someone has to come point out that this picture is completely unrelated. He had 2 prosthetics, both can be found on his Wikipedia page.

Guess I'm the one who gets to be pedantic this time!

[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 68 points 1 year ago

I like how it starts out ALMOST coherent and legalese, but then quickly derails into unhinged rambling with ACCENTUATED capital WORDS like it MATTERS.

[-] Darrell_Winfield@lemmy.world 160 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Ackchyually

Fever is not 100F. A fever is defined as 100.4F. Why 100.4 when 100 is a much easier to remember and handle number? Because fever is defined in humans as 38C, and that converts to 100.4F.

view more: next ›

Darrell_Winfield

joined 2 years ago