Comments by "Kate S" (@KateeAngel) on "Astrum" channel.

  1.  @DataC0llect0r  natives across the Americas actually just thought Europeans were just somewhat different people, who have bigger boats and too obsessed with gold.
    2000
  2. Parasitic life forms evolve to parasitise on certain species of hosts, so why would an absolutely alien life, which is probably even biochmically different, be dangerous to us? I am a microbiologist, and I find it rather unlikely. Also, the fact that you immediately associate viruses and bacteria with danger, even though even here on Earth 99.9% of them aren't dangerous to us humans (in fact many of them are necessary for our survival), tells a lot about society's germophobia and one-sided ways we are taught about microbial life
    74
  3. That is all based on questionable assumptions: that technology will always continue to develop endlessly and can solve any problem you may imagine sooner or later, and that the space colonisation is even ever practically feasible. I don't blame you, those are usual delusions in most people since industrial revolution. If you think more however, those are just assumptions, rooted in blind extrapolation of previous trends into the future. Also, how are generational space ships ethical? Is it ethical to condemn whole generations to life on a ship? That confirms my suspicion that any culture that views expansionism as its goal has to be inherently unethical at its core. Normal culture should seek sustainability and balance with its own environment, and use the resources it already has efficiently, not endless expansion. Again, it is all based on extrapolating the ideal that Western civilisation formed during times of colonialism and imperialism, directing them somewhere else and saying "well, now it is actually not that bad, cause we won't probably meet aliens to displace or enslave" ignoring that the real core problem of expansionist mentality is not simply how it treats indigenous people, but a much deeper one
    14
  4. I also find it pretty wild that some people engage in fantasies of humans colonising those planets easy-peasy, and don't think about how for us, Earth's life form even biosphere with 1% different parameters could be instantly deadly even if all other things are the same (depends on which parameters are actually different, but yeah)
    7
  5. They aren't. "Observer" is anything that interacts with a particle, be it our equipment with an actual human operating it, or equipment by itself, or just a regular object
    5
  6. "creative force" doesn't need to be conscious. Also, then there would be a question where did that obviously complex consciousness come from. If you think complex life can't come from nothing and can't exist since forever, then that would apply to that hypothetical creator too. If you think that hypothetical creator did come from nothing or exist always, then more simple life forms here on Earth could too. Logically you would find yourself in this trap.
    4
  7. What? What are you talking about? Humans evolved 2-3 million years ago from Australopithecus
    3
  8. ​ @Frankwarren1960 that is just a cope out. You have worked yourself into a logical trap by postulating that every life forms needs a creator but then postulating an existence of creator who hasn't been created himself. So you just throw "we can't know it" or claim as a dogma that creator can exist despite not being created unlike everything else. Total lack of logic, just mental gymnastics
    3
  9. Nope they are ok
    3
  10. Stop saying "dinosaurs went extincts". There are plenty of them around today
    2
  11. Tonnes of evidence is nothing to you?
    2
  12. Except solar cycle is on 11 year scale, and temperatures are rising for much longer. If you want to see a clown, look in the mirror
    2
  13.  @john-thejohn-johnson4403  and what is the point of humans colonising anything? I don't see anything good about it either
    2
  14. It is not such a big deal. Space is full of radiation and radioactive elements anyway. And most planets and moons have no magnetic field so they are bombarded by radiation all the time
    2
  15. By this logic cars on roads should be unacceptable because the chance of any one dying from car accident is millions times higher than chance of Cassini probe falling to Earth. Hundreds of thousands die in car accidents every year. If everything, which has even a small chance of killing people, is unacceptable, then almost everything is unacceptable. Cigarettes and alcohol should be banned for sure, for example
    2
  16. It was 280 ppm. And now 420 ppm. That is 50% increase actually. Learn math. And there wasn't increase in volcanic and tectonic activity recently
    2
  17. nope. And we don't need to. Any culture which views expansionist tales as its ideal future, is messed up at its core
    1
  18. In the long term environmental destruction is much more dangerous than any war can be
    1
  19. No climate experts say that. You are reading media and confusing journalists with scientists
    1
  20. I wish my parents could live that long... But they won't 😢
    1
  21. Tardigrades are only able to withstand extreme conditions in the form of cysts. In active form they die from every little thing. They need a lot of water, and Titan has only frozen ice plus hydrocarbons. They would either die immediately or simply never return from cysts to their active form
    1
  22. 😂😂😂 I don't even know what to reply to such moronic statement
    1
  23. Only to you, cause you are uneducated about the topic
    1
  24. Medieval warm period was significantly less warm than you imagine
    1
  25. You are obsessed with money. Of course you are
    1
  26. Wrong. 150 ppm is not an extinction level. Read actual studies, not blogs
    1
  27. ​ @ProXcaliber  ever heard of contraception? Decreading birth rate is all we need
    1
  28. ​ @YraxZovaldo  all we need is to facilitate demographic transition in developing world, which is already happening plus stop trying to increase birth rate back up in developed world. Abolish all pro-natalist policy measures
    1
  29. ​ @yommish  what is your idea of "fascism" then? You use the world frivolously. The idea that one species shouldn't hoard more than half of Earth's resources is actually more altruistic, while anthropocentric ideology is true fascism
    1
  30. ​ @disruptapps  based. Don't listen to butt hurt brainwashed pro-natalists. They are offended at idea of lowering human population because they are blinded by common misconceptions like "growth is good, decline is always bad"
    1
  31. ​ @axle.student  learn about ecological overshoot, please. It is biological resources, especially stability of biosphere that is crucial, and it is what we are running low on.
    1
  32. ​ @yommish also,"climate scientists" often ignore other ecological problems. Ecological overshoot is real problem, climate change is only part of it. Solving only climate change will only increase consumerist frenzy, because people will think 'now it's fine, carbon footprint is zero, so I can consume more"
    1
  33. Clouds aren't even a gas. Scientifically illiterate person spotted
    1
  34.  @Boykot1  Nature does most things better in the long run than "civilisations". people tend to underestimate nature and overestimate civilisations. Thanks sci-fi, I guess, it messed up our perception of reality in many ways. The more I learn the more I find civilisations are inherently destined to be more destructive forces, than constructive ones. After all, it is one species taking as much as possible for itself (in an attempt to decrease their own suffering and death and increase comfort, so it is not really a choice, who would choose to suffer?), depriving millions of other species, thus decreasing biodiversity, abundance, genetic diversity and as a result, destabilising the whole of biosphere
    1
  35. There are multiple possible explanations for that actually
    1
  36. Maths is just an instrument to describe the reality, nothing more
    1
  37. Another emotional science denier. Who would think
    1
  38. Dinosaurs didn't all die! There are 10000 species of them today. Also Pterosaurs, marine reptiles and plenty of groups of invertebrates died off back then
    1
  39. Nope,dude it wasn't warmer than today. Someone lied to you and you believed it
    1
  40. Well I don't desire to exist forever, nor do I intend to reproduce, by your definition I would not be alive anymore 😂
    1
  41. ​@sk8achick4lyff Fusion?😂😂😂
    1
  42. Maybe learn something before writing
    1
  43. I don't care what they think. Empirical evidence shows it absolutely can influence temperature. Learn how to read and interpret scientific papers yourself, then you won't need to rely on anyone's subjective opinions
    1