Not for users outside the US, though.

That was kind of adressed in the rest of the text I wrote. Agree.

That’s not a contradiction, though. They genuinely believe it’s bad for children specifically and ok for adults. And I’d argue that overexposure to sexuality can be bad for children. But I’d also argue there are big differences in the sexuality depicted, the form of the depiction itself, and the age of the child.

Europeans don’t think nothing matters, where did that come from? They just don’t all think sex and nudity are shameful or evil. A positive approach is not the same as nihilistic or desensitized or whatever.

I meen there’s the inside, around those big seeds :)

Wonder what it tastes like.

To make it unquestionable, some people still doubt for some reason.

You can very well prove the physical imposibility of something biological.

Yes, but the equivalent to that would be “this is the US”, right? This sounds like Trump is fighting on the side of Iran.

People have a muscle mass regulating hormone that prevents us from developing huge muscles easily.

Also gorillas don’t eat bananas in the wild, true banana species all come from Asia. The closest they could get is Ensete ventricosum.

Should have turned into a cat, though.

They have a special cello-playing technique - have you even really heard it? Also, it’s a she.

I’d argue spreading complete bullshit is always harmful. And if scientifically proven a bullshit (and this was not her only horribly wrong claim), she should not be kept in an academic position. If she’s not academic and therefore in position of authority, then let her believe whatever she wants - I agree with you on this condition.

This theory has surely been proven as bullshit, though. It’s not good to tolerate every opinion, no matter how outright wrong it is.

Sam Neill came close.

Seems blessed to me.

French and English is switched.

Well, you can definitely ignore that and just take thw projection and view it as something 2d. The fact that the surface is structured doesn’t mean the projection is not 2d - it is 2d curved in the 3d dimension, just like a 1d line can be curved without gaining any thickness. Just like our 3d space is curved.

This is gold, with the original quote containing “shopping”. Made my day, thanks.

A shadow is not the same as a line drawn by a pencil. And a 2d line can be for example the contrast of two colours, the “line” that delimits an object from your perspective - these are no drawn lines with any width, they are not there as full 3d objects. I would think a shadow is a similar case, just as a film projection. It has no thickness.