VirtualOdour

If we're going to get into weird racism based on ethnic origin and geographic location then sorry but I'm out, I don't want people to think anything I said supports or agrees with the ideals of ethnic segregation which you seem to be preaching.

I do not believe there is any scientific evidence or social trends which show white people can't live in the south or black people shouldn't live in North America and Europe, the agenda you have of keeping people sorted into restricted locations based on ethnicity is vile to me and disappointing to see on lemmy.

They've gone down massively, I save enough flying budget to the US with only a rucksack to allow me to eat out every night of my first week and that's just compared to inclusive old fashioned style tickets - which by the way are still the most common option. My whole holiday normally costs less than the ticket price did 25 years ago, plus I fly from the most local Airport to the most local to my accommodation which saves time and money.

If you don't like us poors having options then sorry, you're welcome to pay considerably more for a shitty microwave meal and excess luggage you don't really need but I will be packing a sandwich, sitting a little uncomfortably, in whatever seat is given, using my phone instead of an in seat entertainment system, and not taking heaps of needless stuff.

Personally I'd love if they introduced flexible tickets where I book and they fit me on whatever flight has room within a window of a few days, and I'd love those double decker seats they invented to fit more people, racked compartments you lay in like a Japanese hotel would be amazing too if it fit more people on and lowered the shared cost of the flight.

Peer reviewed science gets overturned by other peer reviewed science all the time, the other person also had peer reviewed science so you don't get to just wave yours and win.

And yes your agenda is very obvious, you take the side of not wanting to be in a nuclear war - I think that's pretty much a universally agreed upon position.

However you also have another facet to your opinion which is almost as universally disagreed with as your other position is agreed with - you think that science should be falsified so it seems to provide answers which suit your social and political aims rather than it being an effort to understand the world and reach a truthful and valid conclusion.

You were very aggressive and rude to someone who did nothing more than provide more context and dissenting evidence in a discussion about science, that's not a good way to behave.

Or leaving the r and also hitting the key next to it, could see some wild insertion pics

Yeah I checked, very wholesome old men in rainbows or posing as couples. A few shirtless.

Pornhub gives different results so im guessing this is for straight guys searching Gary Oldman there.

I know plenty of people that knew him, sure he was a good friend to some but when your whole personality is egotistical attention seeking through violence and disruption then yeah I'm going to quietly laugh at the irony of a shrine which only serves as a reminder to the locals that their life was made a little better and safer.

Who said it was an acceptable scenario? That's not been suggested.

You're saying we should belive any story that makes nuclear war sound even worse than it obviously is regardless of its scientific accuracy. Science should be objective truth not whatever serves the agenda you're trying to push, even if it's objectives are good.

There's a company just made a cool modular house for 10k but we're not allowed to like it because Elon lives in one

It is worrying to see the total disregard for truth people have here, especially while calling out someone else as dishonest.

There's no way to misinterpret what he said accidentally as he explained what he meant, it's just a full and easily disprovable lie of a headline.

Yeah, especially in the southern hemisphere, a few centuries later we might have slightly different genetics through rapid evolution via population collapse but we'd probably be back developing with a bit more accurate folk knowledge and probably actually a lot of remembered tech.

It'd be terrible to the people it happened to but barely a blip in the life history of the planet from the first evolution to the last lifeforms leaving or dying.

This sort of obviously emotionaly driven vitriol makes it look like you want people to belive this regardless of if it truth as you feel it serves an important goal. The other person on the debate has shown an understanding of the issue and history of this topic while remaining civil, I don't see you counter any of his points or raise any evidence in your favor outside gishgallop links which you provide without explanation or demonstrated understanding.

I don't know or really care who's right because it's meaningless but you certainly don't look like the person with a valid position here.