Twist: It was all relative to the life span of a lab mouse, whos life is a living hell in nine out of ten cases.
Meaning... the results will only confirm that there are controlling substances that will allow a populace to endure literal torture, and enable the rich to literally take over the world NOT for efficacy but for sheer chemical complacency.
Genuinely, neat. I wonder how that all financially played out. It was probably mostly a tax deduction. (not that it was bad, but just to point at how the rich have faaaaaar more financial tools to motivate people than those who would ACTUALLY benefit from having access to such things)
Better a shitty psychologist than a fucking pathetic degenerate so willing to judge others on shit they demonstrably do not understand. Genuinely, fuck you.
No, there isn't. At all. What so ever. A soldier is merely a tool by a state that may or may not (and historically NOT) have good intentions.
A soldier is first and foremost instructed to FOLLOW ORDERS. Not because of some nefarious plot to use people, but because doubt on the battlefield can mean a weakness ripe for exploitation, and can introduce delays that mean defeat.
I'm saying the article is absolute clickbait trash and the assumption of a void's effects would be miniscule compared to the effects of dark energy. ... presuming something like MOND is still incorrect, which is closer to the truth as far as we have evidence for. (MOND models do not match observation)
The density of the void we're in is not like some mystical lack of particles for light-milenia. It's just less dense to the point where the assumed distribution the Cosmological Principal would make most probable doesn't match observation exactly. It's been known about for years. Note I said most probable, not possible. It doesn't even break the MANY assumptions made that create the cosmological principle.
I wouldn't call a pathological aversion to sex a kink. It's also not shaming to simply point out the existence of those who are grossed out by it for some reason or another.
They asked for physical pain, so psychosomatic likely doesn't count. Not that they're uninteresting topics or anything....
I used to have similar "pain" from trying to imagine the scale of things. Like when I was a young teen, I'd try to literally visualize what a mile of terrain looked like, or the insanely small scale of molecules, and suddenly I'd lose reference to what 'normal' scale was, and it'd freak me out completely when it felt like the room I was in was both miniscule and insanely vast.
Not really pain, but extreme discomfort that you cannot make go away. There's a term for losing ones' frame of reference for scale, but it escapes me at the moment. Luckily, I got better and better at visualizing things and vast scales stopped triggering what ever that was. Some people have it as a general disability and ohhh boy do I not envy them!
That's not physical, though. They specifically asked for physical pain. No, psychosomatic things don't count, IMO. (although the post on phantom pain is interesting none the less)
Twist: It was all relative to the life span of a lab mouse, whos life is a living hell in nine out of ten cases.
Meaning... the results will only confirm that there are controlling substances that will allow a populace to endure literal torture, and enable the rich to literally take over the world NOT for efficacy but for sheer chemical complacency.