mateomaui @ mateomaui @reddthat.com

Posts

41

Comments

2,025

Joined

2 yr. ago

that last part: huh, an unexpected measure of reasonability.

Trump being impeached but acquitted after the insurrection means he can't be punished for it due to double jeopardy

So are they suggesting that to also get him out of Jack Smith’s Jan 6 case?

My only hope is that, somehow, they have verifiable already ruled against Trump before in other cases and filings.

And also that maybe ruling for him with Biden still in office now would set precedent to potentially backfire on Republicans somehow.

Both are stretches.

unfortunately, yeah.

I don’t know whether to be excited or worried.

More likely just him being stupid and bringing it up in search results more due to some Streisand effect. But your theory is also entirely plausible with him.

And plenty of people smarter than you have debunked the notion that the size of the birth canal historically was significant to the size of brains, since most children experience most of their size increase after being born. That more children are saved via c-sections because they’re larger from earlier development or because they’re just relatively larger than their mother isn’t statistically significant for brain size or the practical results of that increase.

This has been covered in other replies and it’s obvious you’re being obtuse about it, so I’m ending the conversation from my end here. Enjoy arguing with someone else about it.

Your add-on breakdown wasn’t necessary, you’re not informing me of anything, I already provided the relevant info in other replies.

You didn’t mention intelligence, but that’s the only logical conclusion to draw from suggesting larger brains in our current population is an advantage or important, or “means nothing”/anything.

If you want to get on the eugenics train, Elon is available for discussion.

Correlation within the current human species only, there was development other than just size from ancient history that you aren’t accounting for.

If you’re talking about the 10% myth, I wasn’t referring to that, but there are documented cases including at least one person missing most of their brain from a long-term condition where the brain filled with fluid, leaving a thin perimeter of brain matter, and they were otherwise still fully functional except for weakness in one leg. A total mystery, and provided proof that the brain can rewire itself and doesn’t need most of its volume to function correctly, and suggested evidence that the brain uses what’s needed, but that most of it isn’t required.

edit:

https://qz.com/722614/a-civil-servant-missing-most-of-his-brain-challenges-our-most-basic-theories-of-consciousness

Note that while it does say he was of below average intelligence but not mentally disabled, that’s not the point. The point in me providing this here is that losing most of his brain over time didn’t affect the intelligence he naturally had, or affect other brain function, so he was fully functioning and normal as far as anyone was concerned until he went to check what was going on with his leg. Providing proof that most of the brain probably isn’t needed, and possibly redundant to compensate for loss.

No one said brain size doesn’t mean anything, although there is no documented correlation between brain size and intelligence, and since we don’t use most of our brains anyway, more volume mostly equals more unused volume.

What was said is that historically brain size wasn’t determined by the size of the birth canal, because most growth happens after birth anyway, and that’s the main functional reason for the skull to still be soft and need more protection than later. Else we would come out with fully formed brains and fully formed, hardened skulls.

Which should be obvious to you if you compare the size of any infant’s head with any adult’s head.

And why are you so sensitive about being asked what’s wrong with it other than it being completely factually wrong?

One of my best friends in college towered over me and his mom barely came up to my chin. His dad wasn’t even a tall guy either, he just inherited some recessive genes or something. It was a pretty usual thing for him and his mom to be standing side by side and she’d say something out loud like “I have no idea how you ever came out of me.”

Dumb shit blocks me, oh no, anyway.

I was wrong, you did come up with an even dumber reply.

For the sake of argument, I looked up the word “the”:

https://www.oed.com/dictionary/the_adj?tab=factsheet#18778131

It doesn’t contain that message I referred to.

Yes, the soft cranial plates and sutures specifically allow for it, which unfortunately can result in brain damage if forceps are used to pull a larger kid out. I know of at least one case where a child never spoke until they eventually got treatments from a craniosacral therapist, and one day just straight asked for a glass of water to the total shock of the parents. They had been learning things normally, but cranial pressure affected the area responsible for speech. Which is one reason why we should be thankful c-sections are a safe option, instead of some conservatives saying people who get them aren’t technically mothers.

All I can do is shake my head at it. Someone carries a child to term, and opts for a manner of birth that was probably safer for their situation, and so the conservative party of family values decides they aren’t technically a mother. That is as dumb and insulting as it can get.

I thought that was the case, but thank you for clarifying.

You mean other than being completely factually wrong?

Brain size hasn’t been historically limited by the size of the birth canal, it doesn’t work like that, most growth takes place after birth. The fact that some children develop faster in the womb and require a c-section doesn’t make it true either.

The context is that he’s replying to a known pusher of eugenics. It’s not completely apparent in the post Elon replied to, but if you see enough of that user’s posts it becomes apparent.

edit: it’s also worth mentioning that sometimes a larger child is simply due to genetics from one parent. I know many very tall, large people whose mothers are very tiny, petite people. It could be considered a miracle when the birth happens naturally in those cases, but doesn’t have anything to do with the child having a larger brain. They’re just generally relatively larger than their mother.

Unbelievable / completely believable

every unusual entry

From that you somehow ended up at “the”…

That is possibly the dumbest reply you could have come up with. I commend you.

I’ve just given them away on reddit. The trading sites are fine but rarely does anyone have a key I want, while also wanting a key that I have. Just easier to donate to a random gamer.