I don’t think it’s the brain but rather our consciousness that is limited. Our sensory inputs are always on and processed by the brain, but our consciousness is very picky and also slow.

People can sometimes recall true memories that they weren’t aware of, or react to things they didn’t think of and such.

Consciousness is also somehow lagging behind the actual decision making, but always presents itself as the cause of action.

Sort of like Windows telling you that you removed a USB stick 2 seconds after you did it and was well aware of it happening. Consciousness is like that, except it takes responsibility for it too…

When it encounters something that it didn’t predict, it’ll tell you that “yeah this happened and this is why you did that”. Quite often the explanation for doing something is made up after it happened.

This is a good thing mostly, because it allows you to react faster than having to consider your options consciousnessly. You do not need to or have time to make a conscious decision to dodge a dodgeball, but you’ll still think you did.

Removed by mod

And February 29 doesn’t happen on years ending in 00 unless the year ends in 000.

That’s not correct. Centuries are not leap years, unless they’re divisible by 400 (not 1000). So, 2400 will be a leap year, but 3000 will not.

Yes, the atmospheric CO2 is still rising due to emissions from previous decades.

The decline mentioned in the title is the current emmisions. The article goes on to explain it like this:

Locally, Europe and America have lowered their emmisions in the recent years, but global emmisions have still rised due to China emitting even more.

This June however, China’s emmisions have also decreased, so it might be a sign of a peak being reached.

Energy consumption is still increasing, but renewable sources provide enough for that, and it’s economical the best option, so the rising demand does not cause more emmisions.

Personally, I’m afraid it is too soon to tell. I also wonder where all the drilled oil and mined coal goes, because if there is an actual decline in fossil fuel usage, we’d be hearing from the oil companies and experience lower gas prices etc. Any fossil that is mined or pumped up is going to get burned, so I’d really like to see a decline in fossil extractions before celebrating.

Also, in order to address the atmospheric CO2 levels, we need something entirely different. Forests and CO2 capture etc., which have a long way to go still.

There will be plenty news about him after that. If anything he’s going to be unleashed by whatever he thinks is restrictive for the election, so I expect the worst. Also all his grifting and law suits and all that shit.

I’m considering blocking everything including his name, because I seriously can’t stand watching his disgusting face anymore and nothing good is ever going to come out of it.

Yeah well, I think a lot of people can actually do that. It’s rough times for fartists.

It’s not an entirely lost (f)art. Jackass had a skit with a similar guy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukIHMUibMio

Guinness World Records made him famous. He’s also the only person from that book that I remember anything about.

I wonder why he decided to eat 15 shopping carts. Like, the point of it would be proven after, I don’t know, 7?

I can hear it and am not American.

Try snubbing your nose while saying"those people"

Ok, now I’m not a linguist and also not English, but in my opinion there’s a difference. “People” is a broad undefined group. “Persons” is a more defined group.

Adding “those” in front also alienates them further. So by saying “those people”, you are distancing yourself from them, despite them being your family. That is the amusing part for the person you talked to. You mildly insulted your family.

In a similar vain, “some people say” all the stuff that you won’t to be heard saying yourself, even if it’s your own opinion.

Or in some places (this might be more local) using "you"or even “one” instead of “me” when answering personal questions. For instance if someone asks: “How does it make you feel?” and answered: “It makes you feel sad” then the person answering it is distancing themselves from their own answer by literally answering on behalf on some unknown “you” when they should be using “me”. Using “people” is sort of the same just on behalf of someone else.

Yup, that’s how it’s done when there’s a heat exchanger.

However there’s a reason why the boiler room is usually locked off in a 30 story building. Bleeding a radiator might be relatively harmless, but there’s no way of knowing what the pressure is supposed to be without knowing the entire system.

Some (lower) buildings might even have direct district heating without an exchanger, which is absolutely no go to even bleed.

That depends entirely on how the system is set up. I would only ever consider increasing the amount of water in the system if I was absolutely certain that my apartment was on a completely separate and closed circuit than the other apartments. You should contact the janitor or whatever it’s called.

Anyone running for President should be able to rationally predict which questions they’ll be asked in a debate. answer any of these questions

Elon’s father seems to disagree…

https://futurism.com/elon-musk-dad-emerald-mine

You would if you tried unsticky shampoo. It would be way too fluid, drip right off and get in your eyes.

Gluten can be used in shampoo to make it more sticky.

Goes to show that it’s only human.

Think more down the line. Having a 3% middle man would be rather annoying, because whatever the other parties come up with needs to be approved by the 3% over and over, to make a majority, making the 3% the most powerful position.