I was using the term "mental retardation" in a more literal sense vis a vis a literal slowing of the mind, a dampening of the intellect. Which is the chemtrails conspiracy generally (mind control of sorts), and honestly what I (mistakenly) thought you were alluding to with the "people who need to be aware of it" remark. Cloud seeding is a more recent addition.
We'll say 100 grams of seeding material per spread
I have no idea where you got that number, but first, a quick Google on the silver iodide (preferred cloud seeding material) required on a typical seeding run is 25-100kg, or 25-1000x what your estimate is. Give that AgNO3 is 234g/mol and Al2O3 is ~102g/mol, you get the same number of Al2O3 particles at about 1/2 the mass expense, so 12.5-500x your estimate for the same effect. Either way, adding kilograms of effectively-pulverized-sand absolutely introduces the polishing effect.
Second, even if 100g per run in a 737 means 100g dispersed over some 3,000+ miles, so 33mg/mile at best, which comes to about 6 micrograms per linear foot. If that's cloud-seeding density, I should be kicking up thunderstorms every time I polish my tailpipe. No, that's not a euphemism.
You talk about surfactants... that's on the right track, but you were a little closer with the nanoparticle idea. If you conjugated the Al2O3 with a soluble chelating agent or packaged it in a more soluble nanoparticle, it could protect it and the engine parts through combustion. At which point, maybe the nanoparticle shell degrades in the high temps of the jet engine exhaust, exposing the Al2O3. It would be a pretty cool chemistry achievement honestly.
But you'd probably be better off working with some other cloud seeding agent.
To quote my original comment again
You get what you wished for, but it's twisted because of Man's fallen/imperfect nature, sure
So now the question is: why did you even suggest that I suggested the wishes were cursed? I only explored that possibility because you brought it up.
But since we're back to the "be careful what you wish for"/Monkey's Paw premise...
The money he wished for had zero to do with his death
WHICH IS THE PROBLEM. The Simpsons/Flanders' thing was comedic effect - the actual Monkey's Paw premise... fuck I've already explained it twice. There's no twist of the greed in his wish being his undoing or anything like that, just "oh yea, and uh... the crazy girl kills him" after he follows Bear home to tell him the wish is real after it was just fucking raining money out of nowhere after making his wish. Why did it take him like an hour to realize that? Why is Sarah's body in there, and where was it in the meantime?
...anyway
So it isn't the paw that is evil, it's the user.
So Bear is evil? No. It's the thing I said - the moral of the same story that's been woven a bajillion times going back to Socrates. Man's desires may be pure, but his intellect and will are not. Therefore godlike powers (wishes, in this case) are doomed. Nm; I just realized I'm explaining algebra to a chimp. Only took repeating myself what, 3 times? I'm improving.
At the concentrations needed for cloud seeding (let alone mass mental retardation), adding something as abrasive as aluminum oxide to fuel would destroy fuel pumps and engines before they even got off the ground. It's a polishing agent FFS, and generally insoluble in like... anything. You either buy it in powder or in a pasty suspension.
So if they are adding it, it's not in the fuel mix.
You get what you wished for, but it's twisted because of Man's fallen/imperfect nature, sure
Literally in my comment above. But we could also explore evidence of a curse.
To quote the first clerk when Bear goes to buy the OWW:
"Don't come back complaining"
Bear: "Do people complain about these?"
C: "Well, they're kind of like, collectibles, so some people don't open them. But the people who do come back and complain."
...small talk...
Bear: "...why do they complain? Because they're mad? Because it doesn't work?"
C: "Yea, or whatever."
Bear: "Or it does work, and it ruins their lives?"
C: "Or they die or wish they were dead..." [mocking, then serious look while nodding]
Bear: "You're good..." [thinking she's acting]
Seems like pretty strong "suggestion" (I would call it ham-fisted declaration, which isn't uncommon in the genre) that it's a Monkey's Paw premise we're about to see unfold... which we do. There's actually never any evidence that "People in the movie use it and they are happy with the wish" - we see exactly two people in the movie use the wish, and both end up dead... so I'm not really sure what your basing your assessment on.
Even when Bear goes back to the shop, then next clerk says:
"Yea yea yea yea yea you made a shitty wish, and now you wanna reverse it." <-- like this is a very common thing with that product.
I guess maybe that line from the clerk "Oh I already used my wish" and the fact that he's still alive makes you think it's usually okay? At no point does he say he's happy with his wish though, so I'm really trying to figure out why you say:
People in the movie use it and they are happy with the wish
Person in the movie says he used it (could be lying as to not get involved with a hysteric stranger covered in blood complaining about his wish) and is possibly happy with the wish (again, undetermined). Everyone else we see use it ends up miserable and/or dead.
And, if it's not cursed, it makes even less sense to shoot the $1B friend guy in the head. The script is way too messy for the praise it got (among other problems), and now I'm pissed that I had to sift/sit through that shitty pacing and dialogue.
Like I said initially, usually the moral of the "be careful what you wish for" story isn't that wishes are inherently cursed, it's that man's desires are often ill-motivated or impure, and our will is imperfect. Therefore when we try to "god" something into existence through our will, the results spiral out of control quickly. But in this case, maybe the thing is cursed. That would give a better explanation for the sort of random bullet to the head for $1B guy.
Yea I just started watching the Barbie movie, and I was taken aback when Nurse Barbie or Doctor Barbie or whatever was a tranny. Very not-passing, sounds exactly like a dude trying to pass, jawline and everything... and I mean, how stupid to have him juxtaposed against a bunch of actual women. His makeup is caked on to remove the hard masculine lines from his face to the point he about looks like a damn geisha, his voice is even deeper than Dylan Mulvaney's, and yet he's cast as a female doll alongside a bunch of actual women with tastefully-done makeup (even for Hollyweird). I had to stop the movie when he spoke because it was so obvious he was a dude. Chicks on too much steroids sound like dudes who huffed helium, but dudes trying to sound like women just sound like gay dudes.
The irony of all the dolls not having genitalia isn't lost on me, but there are clearly-defined male and female dolls. They're genital-free because they're kids' toys. Even Mattel understands shoving adult genitals into kids' faces isn't appropriate, even if the Algae Beety Clueless movement doesn't.
I watched "Obsession" because it was all the rage for a minute, revered for being a "real horror movie" or something and better than all the "Hollywood slop."
I'm not upset that it was bad - I'm upset that people whose opinions I respect regarded it as good. Just listened to Critical Drinker's take, and having seen the movie, it sounds like he's doing fan service. He glosses over a lot to discuss the good aspects. Nikki's character was acted well, but that's pretty much all the good things I can say for the movie. It felt exactly like the budget indie flick that it was, though I have to agree it's better than 99% of the turds Hollywood pushes out. But that's an indictment on Hollywood, not praise for Obsession.
[Spoilers Ahead]
Writing - terrible. Pace - terrible. Not horror, barely suspenseful, ending made very little sense - like, it's a Monkey's Paw premise, right? You get what you wished for, but it's twisted because of Man's fallen/imperfect nature, sure. It's contrived, but it's an age old premise that can still work as a plot device, okay.
So where's the Monkey's Paw irony in the guy who wished for $1B taking a bullet to the head for just walking through the door? When he makes the wish, money starts raining down - wouldn't it be more fitting if he was like, buried in money and suffocated? Or killed in a robbery, then the robber could be killed in his ravenous greed or whatever. Also, why does it take him hours to come to the realization that the wish worked (walks through the door saying "It actually worked!" or "It's real" or whatever) when it literally started raining wads of cash on him the moment he made the wish.
Also, wtf with the body of the girl Nikki killed being in the living room or whatever? That surprised Bear, so where was the body before that? And you knew in the opening scene with the cat taking pills that it was Chekhov's suicide - someone was going to die from pills.
Again, not disappointed that it was shitty, disappointed that people who should've seen it was shitty said it was kinda good. /rant
authority box
I've heard "idiot box" a lot in music and pop culture, but I'm surprised I haven't heard this one before. Seems much more apt. Moral authority from Full House and the rest of TGIF. News authority from the political networks. Economic authority from Saturday morning cartoons (buy our cereal and toys!). I suppose it goes hand in hand - it's an authority box for idiots.
The cycle of abuse/violence is well documented, yet no one wants to extend this to faggotry (anymore, most studies you find on it are old).
I lost some 90% of my friend group between covid and "controversial trans stuff" occurring alongside covid. Didn't refute my arguments, didn't ponder my arguments, just stopped talking to me once I cited true, observable statistics and well-known science. I even had more than one guy DM me and say (paraphrased) "you're right, but we can't be friends anymore." And in one case I said I understood - his wife and sister had/have more permanent connections to him than I did/do, so he was preserving his social safety net in lieu of the truth. Like any good collectivist would do - "Go along to get along" becomes "go along to get it wrong."
Got accused of watching Fox News and written off as a "Fox News watcher" from yet another long time friend even though I very much don't watch Fox News, so idk where that idea even came from if not collectivist programming to "other" people like me (and the "other" are a collective too in their mind, so they all do the same thing).
I could go through all of them, but suffice it to say... I guess we've had different experiences. The past 5-6 years have been a referendum on the truth in my life, with most of my (ex) friends opting for the lies.
See the link I posted in edit: https://cdn.videy.co/KcDApiTS1.mp4
You aren't a trusted source for inserting a new thought. Your certificate becomes invalid once you espouse objectivity that runs counter to their programming. Only the MSM are allowed to do that for the NPC. You don't get write access.
Didn't associate it until you mentioned book writing, but Michael Knowles' Speechless: Controlling, Words Controlling Minds discusses the same thing at length.
They may ree but that night they will lay in bed and question themselves
Oh you sweet summer child. Maybe I've OD'd on black pills, but in my experience they just double down. They don't go to bed - they go to their echo chamber to reinforce what a bigot you are for, idk, advocating for objective, unbiased standards (moral, academic, professional) or whatever you've said to tilt them.
You think the Whites didn't try to reason with the Bolsheviks? The Nazis didn't try to reason with the SPD and the Communists?
Maybe if someone is just dipping their toes in the ideology, you can change them. But if they're calling you racist or whatever just to shut down a logical, coherent, well-thought out point... odds are they're too far gone. Zealots aren't well known for self-reflection.
Clearly the Nazis were right in removing the scourge of transgenderism, but here this dipshit is acting like it was some sort of tragedy. And he is surrounded by a table full of dipshits who agree, broadcasting to an entire demographic of dipshits who agree. You aren't going to change that level of programming.
Yea Chris Plante has been describing this phenomenon for at least a decade with a recurring expression: "They say the words, but they don't know what they mean."
Kinda funny that we can all understand the meaning through different expressions, while a leftist coddling a nigger while chastising a White for the same behavior "isn't racist" because y'know, Leftism. "Racist" is a magic word.
Oh and how can I forget Michael Knowles' book Speechless: Controlling, Words Controlling Minds which also goes on at length about this (not new or novel) phenomenon.
Kek "That's her?! Get that niggress!"
So the ease of access to it is the same root as the obesity problem. Normal human desires made too easy to achieve through the quality of life presented by modern society. And much like obesity, it can really only be defeated by restraint and discipline.
You must be a carpenter you hit the nail on the head so perfectly.
But, unlike food, nobody wants to talk to their kids about titties and masturbation (for good reason) so they are mostly left on their own to swim in it. And it really ruins them before they are even old enough to recognize it.
Most people don't even get to talk to their kids about moderating food intake. It's often not that they don't want to, it's just that it's not a topic the kids want to engage in. It's boring. It involves responsibility, being future-conscious, etc. But it's worth the discomfort on both ends, at least that's what I've found.
...How many generations have you seen Lestat?
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of Christianity, but rather than get in an hours long back and forth of comments like I normally do, I'm going to advise you to voice your take to a Catholic/Orthodox priest or other traditional Christian apologist. Or at least look into apologetics. Suffice it to say Christianity absolutely works within human hierarchical frameworks. Given the current state of the faith though (infinite Protestant factions + LDS and whatnot), and given that it's a common gripe of mine, I can also see how you've come to your conclusion.