LibertyLizard

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Birds and mammals are widely considered to be intelligent but fish (or rays if you want to be pedantic) are not.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Name’s Thetys. Thetys vagina.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

a horse and an Boeing 747 are both just transportation.

But… they are.

[–] [email protected] 53 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Lol I know this is a joke but they died out, tree sloths existed back then too and are a totally separate group of animals. They didn’t evolve from the animals that dug this tunnel. They do share a common ancestor millions of years ago but this is like saying saber tooth cats evolved into house cats.

[–] [email protected] 73 points 1 month ago (9 children)

Selective breeding is a form of genetic modification. That’s what it’s trying to say.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Thank god I’m a botanist. While the fact that my photo reels are entirely composed of detailed close-ups of plant sex organs is a bit disconcerting when you think about it, they’re much more aesthetically pleasing than dead animals.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Well the common ones in California do. I assume they would plant similar species as only a few are hardy to frosts.

Just make sure to avoid Phoenix palms. That’s the most common one in my area and they have like 6 inch spines that can cause serious injuries. They’re also quite weedy.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I’m familiar with this chemistry, but I wonder if you are? Carbon dioxide’s various reactions with water are normally in equilibrium with the atmosphere, meaning if you increase the carbon in the water, it will off-gas any extra carbon until it returns to equilibrium. Hence the need for some unique chemistry (or other process) to keep the carbon in place for an extended period.

Am I a science denier? Would I be a science denier if I questioned Exxon’s public statements about climate change in the 90s? What a silly question.

PS: there’s no chemistry in this link that I can find so I have no idea where you are getting that idea.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Stay classy, republicans.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Thanks but I’m not going to take a company trying to get rich off of this technology at their word. The claim that it will stay down there when there’s no solid barrier seems dubious, unless there’s some unique chemical process at play here.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

Why is the Delta considered the best sequestration site in the state? I thought you wanted to pump into certain types of bedrock to mineralize the CO2 to prevent it from leaking. The valley has basically no bedrock under it for thousands of feet, so this plan makes little sense to me. What keeps it from leaking back out?

view more: ‹ prev next ›