Yeah, that’s not a showerthought. That’s something you remembered in the shower.

I think you’re right, they do (or did) like her. But she got parodied in “The Problem with a Poo” (S22E03).

Which is funny because one of the most famous quotes when it comes to their personal political position is Matt stone with “I hate conservatives but I really fucking hate liberals”.

In the end all they are trying to do is just to be funny. And they nail that, even in the 3rd decade. They are the perfect example of an “equal opportunity offender”.

Now that’s a rare take. Usually the first 2 seasons are regarded as the worst and have very childish humour compared to later ones.

Season 10 is pretty much the start of peak South Park. It had the Cartoon Wars two parter and the iconic Warcraft episode. Also introduced ManBearPig and the “Nice” meme …

I think my least favourite season would be the 20th which is the whole Garrison as Trump story line. They really wrote themselves into a couple of corners with that one. Though the troll-trace subplot is amazing.

I think it’s 6 episodes and 2 specials a year now. The first one already dropped this year. “The End of Obesity”.

I’ve been watching it the day it came out in 1997 and while it had it’s ups and downs, the show still mostly holds up today. And even the brand new stuff still sometimes makes you go “They really put that in there??” which I think just shows how brilliant the show is.

The IBM Simon, Nokia Communicator or Ericsson R380 for example.

I totally agree. But the question was about inventions not mass adaption.

That’s like saying Henry Ford invented the car because the Model T was the first widely available one.

Sure, but the iPhone was far from the first smartphone.

That was 20th century.

Dog and cat food are totally suitable for human consumption. It’s only when you eat nothing else over a long time that you will run into nutritional problems.

So it’s totally fine to chug a beer, huff some glue and eat a can of cat food to help you fall asleep; As long as you otherwise eat healthy.

The ratio on this post makes me think there is hope for lemmy afterall.

Not sure what you mean by that.

I can offer you bad, terrible, aweful, dreadful, horrendous, vile, digusting … but I wouldn’t say evil.

Removed by mod

Angry upvote …

I work in web and app development company and we don’t check Firefox anymore, because it’s the only outlier and has not many users.

Fellow webdev here, You’re absolutly correct.

My point is: How can you be so sure it has been dismissed?

Models that don’t work should be dismissed. If you have a model for shrinkage that does work it should not be dismissed.

It appears, the SM doesn’t disagree with shrinkage at all.

Yup, pretty much.

But why does it seem your mind being blown by this idea? Maybe be because you didn’t consider us being sucked in anywhere? If that’s the case, here’s why didn’t you consider this yet: I didn’t yet post my post despite the probability of not having a new thought.

Sorry, I’m not following. My mind is definitly NOT blown and black holes don’t “suck in” things. That’s a common misconception. And I really don’t know what you’re trying to say with the sentences after that.

Your unfriendliness could just have hurt a kid’s interest into space. Remember that.

I’m sorry that you think I was unfriendly.

But this a community for people that smoked too much weed to saything dumb things that sound clever when you don’t think about them too much.

If there is actual kids around that are interested in space theneven more important that unscientific non-sense gets called out.

[1] https://www.science20.com/hammock_physicist/universe_expanding_or_are_we_shrinking-118673

Quite interesting article, you should read it.

But the TL;DR here is that so far all “shrinking gravity” models had major flaws and didn’t work. And the last idea of perfeclty scaling atoms is unobservable, so really more of a thought expriment than an actual model.

Well you can’t win a nobel prize while ignoring the standard model, can you?

Yes you can. You just have to come up with a new model that matches all the current data just as well or better than the standard model.

There hardly ever is a theory that can explain everything. We basically just go with the model that matches that data the closest.

Maybe some future astrophysicist will hook up on this.

I mean the “expansion is just shrinking from another perspective” is not exactly an outlandish or super original thought. I’m sure past astrophysicist have considered it for quite a while, but so far all have dismissed it.

The expansion of the universe has been confirmed over and over again since it was discovered in 1929, even won the 2011 noble price when they discovered the expansion is accelerating. It’s been basically confirmed over and over again for close to 100 years.

I guess “What instead of the universe expanding we’re just shrinkng?” would have been a great showerthought. But you really should just leave at that.

Once you’re trying to come up with explanations involving physics buzzwords it just sounds like pseudoscientific gibberish.