That number is not going to be accurate what so ever for a product that’s not even commercialized yet…

I mean, in the example you’re responding to, many of the people aren’t doing the “technically correct” answer of, “microbial life will continue”.

They’re just morons who heard, “life finds a way” and assume humans will be fine.

Literally, military recruitment.

Promise we’ll pay you all those benefits! It’s as good as free college!

I dunno’, it’s arguably GOOD ethics to try and swindle evil-slated money to a normal project. Assuming the normal scientist doesn’t actually make the taped on puppy shredder.

“… that I really don’t know what to think.”

There, you’re starting to get it! That’s exactly what the religious do. Get confused, start using “god did it” as a gap filler in their knowledge, and soon, they “know” less than nothing.

No, it’s not “god of the gaps” to deny elementary school education.

This post is specifically selecting for the complete morons who won’t even listen to a basic explanation of refraction…

If you say, “well a lot of religious people will say that!” then yes. Yes, religious people are morons.

NASA doesn’t let anything go forward without backup plans, and backup plans for the backup plans. The only way it was going to really put egg on Boeing’s face is if it goes kaboom with the crew aboard. No backup plans for death, yet!

The last time? aaaahahahaa… no. There are several phenomenon that require energy levels that only stellar objects can throw off. They’ll be asking for bigger colliders even when they’re dedicated space stations firing what would be equivalent to weapons of mass destruction at each other.

Unless scientists can figure everything out just by observing space, there will always be a demand for a bigger collider. Since scientists like to control variables and don’t like waiting for random events that they then almost have to reverse-engineer to explain (without most all of the sensitive detectors built in to these colliders), there will always be a demand.

Yes, literally already being worked on. By rocket scientists.

Not THAT complex. They already have several prototypes they’re planning on testing. They won’t be giant rotating stations, but rooms of a few meters across. It doesn’t take much rotation to get useful amounts of g’s.

Well, in that vein, there are many light weight solar powered “cars”. Some formula of solar panels don’t use much of rare/bad materials, and salt batteries are already a thing, so certain constructions wouldn’t need to climb much of a hill to become a net-positive.

They are saying there are zero cars that fit the bill. Why is an “unusual” car not part of “all cars”? It’s a basic question of what set is being considered.

Of course if you limit “cars” to be anything that is over 1000lbs with an engine, THAT set of “cars” is going to be far less economical than some other vehicles that many would still call a “car”.

Does it have to be usual when the qualifier on the negative is “none”?

WRONG!! Velomobiles and other man-powered (or nature powered) land vehicles absolutely exist.

I’d argue if you’re making the human more efficient than walking, you’re reducing CO2 output compared to simply walking there.

If a reduction in human CO2 compared to distance traveled isn’t good for the environment, then nothing is good for the environment.

No, that’s NOT begging the question, that’s just being an ass about actually asking a question.

Being hostile to a real question’s answers is also not begging the question.

Begging the question is a logical fallacy where someone is purposefully leaving out info or otherwise twisting things to end at a conclusion that was never properly supported. The point is there is an unsupported conclusion they’re trying to jump to.

Simply asking a question, even one with an obvious or sarcastic answer, is seldom “begging the question”.

Uhhhhh it’s an OPEN question available to people who DO dislike the OS, so no. No just ASKING a question is NOT “begging the question”.

It’s asking a question.

Evolution works like a tree’s structure branches over time. That’s why it’s always animated like that. It is NOT that everything gets expressed and then gets tested. It is that the current thing “alive” is changing. It seems crazy now only because you’re seeing the veeeeerry complicated leaves at the ends of very complicated branches. Branches that have mostly ended by now.

You know what happens to animals with unsurvivable mutations? They die. All the time. Even humans with unsurvivable mutations happen ALL THE TIME.

That’s why it’s ridiculous to outlaw abortion: Bad things randomly happen all the time, because it’s a complicated process with LOTS of areas that can go wrong. It goes wrong all the time. The body has mechanisms to fix a lot of “wrongness”, but macro-level bad stuff still happens all the time.

The same thing happens on a species level over many survivable generations.

It IS basically “trial and error”, but trial and error in a VERY complicated and dynamic system after a very, very long time, currently stemming from the complicated results of that system.

You cannot dismiss the system just because one aspect confuses you when removed from context…

But I’ll taddle on myself, I know it!

Maaaan, I’m so sad I never watched that series long enough to even get the normal baddies, let alone all the fan characters they pulled in by the end.

… though maybe I spared myself the embarassment of becoming a brony, so…