Varyk

it sounds like they consider a male seahorse a male because he produces sperm rather than eggs.

The female seahorse drops her eggs off into a male brood pouch, a little pocket the male seahorse has on the front of him that has a placenta in it, and then he fertilizes those eggs and carries the fetuses for a few weeks and then little seahorses flutter out when he gives birth.

there's a video. and it's a LOT of baby flutterhorses

https://animals.howstuffworks.com/fish/male-seahorses-give-birth.htm

thanks, haha, I was checking the comments before I said "discworld"

you are making things up and pretending I said things I didn't.

I specifically disclaimed that crystals do not cure cancer and magnetic bracelets don't work, and then provided a couple incontrovertible proofs that electromagnetic fields("energy") affect physiological processes ("frequencies") to demonstrate the limited scientific understanding and allowance of the meme.

you are caught up on the simple existence of random, inanimate objects that do not have significant clinical effect on physiological processes and incorrectly extending those false analogies to the particular relevance of electromagnetic fields that do have clinical effect on physiological processes.

Your false assumption is that because dried turtle or rocks or Xboxes don't cure specific diseases(irrelevant and illogical examples that you fabricated and are arguing against all by yourself), energy does not affect frequencies(despite incontrovertible historical and current proof, that you admit to, that energy does affect frequencies).

The illogical and unscientific examples you are making up by yourself to have something to argue against?

Those are false.

Electromagnetic fields affecting physiological processes, specifically tissue regeneration in the referenced studies?

That is true, and proof that science is still discovering new uses for "energy", even though you and OP were unaware of those advancements.

i dont know If there's any implication for that, but there is certainly a mental image.

The meme is about how science won't discover that "energy" alters your "frequencies".

This premise has been proved wrong countless times throughout history leading up to today: photosynthesis, radiation poisoning, microwaves,radio waves, gravity, x-rays, ultrasound, infrasound....

Understand that list of discovered energies and frequencies that have changed the world is not exhaustive.

One of the recent examples of energies altering your frequency are NASA's studies of the clinically significant effects of tvemf, pulsed electromagnetic fields, influencing tissue regeneration, specifically neural tissue and cartilage documented in the studies linked above.

Your argument, and that of the OP, against all ongoing evidence to the contrary, is that you happen to be writing your comments at the absolute apex of historical and technological science, that your lay understanding of such science is sufficient, and all of the scientists who are telling you that you are wrong and new technology and scientific concepts are still being developed, studied, and experimented with constantly are incorrect.

You maintaining that because some inanimate objects do not alter physiological processes, "energy" cannot affect your "frequency" is an absurd illogic.

You are tossing a rock in the air and swearing that planes cannot exist because the rock falls to the ground while planes are flying over your head.

many people mistake the brief moments they are alive for the culmination of history, but this is a selfish and limited understanding of time and history and the next generation will prove you wrong.

Heck, the next Xbox console is going to prove you wrong.

technology marches forward, and so does the human understanding of science.

you should be less proud of your ignorance.

the few moments you are alive are less unique than you want them to be, and you know less than you think you do.

why, indeed?

I'm not the op who made the assumption you're referring to, try asking them.

i assume they made their assumption for the sake of humor.

clearly a barn-burner.

dogs have 8-10 nipples, and wookies are reportedly based on dogs, so it may be a safe bet to up your estimate!

teats, because in the holiday special malla(chewie's wife) does not have pronounced breasts, implying wookie teats.

I'm glad we addressed this.

that's alright, the stuff before and after wasn't important either

phew, good thing nobody made any of those claims.

what are you talking about?

NASA is very specifically studying and documenting clinically significant physiological effects of low-amplitude pulsed electromagnetic fields.

crystals and magnet bracelets don't emit electromagnetic fields at all, and NASA isn't claiming they do.

why are you replying to me with arguments against your own false assumptions?

neither my comments nor NASA's studies have anything to do with what you're talking about.

nope, this study specifically focuses on the neuronal regenerative effects of electromagnetic fields, not simple voltage:

"The present investigation details the development of model systems for growing two- and three-dimensional human neural progenitor cells within a culture medium facilitated by a time-varying electromagnetic field (TVEMF)."

The study is interesting and informative about fundamental biological effects of magnetism, for anyone who wants to read it.

The frequencies don't have to be new so much as understood.

NASA has concluded electromagnetic frequencies are actively healthy for humans, specifically promoting neural tissue regeneration, so try not to unilaterally dismiss everything crystal hippies say.

babies, bathwater, all that.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20030075722

NASA's doing research right now with tvmf to develop cartilage regeneration as well.

https://technology.nasa.gov/patent/MSC-TOPS-96

throwing a magnet bracelet on isn't going to cure cancer, but magnetism has clinically significant effects on many basic physiological processes like the circadian rhythm and that's why it keeps being studied.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9346374/