2
Flarisu 2 points ago +2 / -0

T-Cells don't target cancer cells. That's the main reason why we can't cure cancer.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

Gas basically does the same thing, if you want to store a lot of energy on a vehicle, the energy density is at risk of exposure.

Thing is - batteries use a chemical storage method that rapidly explodes when it's oxidized and hydrocarbon fuel needs a spark catalyst in order to combust. A battery explodes if it's ruptured in any way, while a ruptured gas tank as long as it's not sparked, doesn't explode.

This is why in vehicles we use chemical batteries like zinc or lead which don't explode when the chemicals oxidize. Li-o has this problem, but it's the battery with the highest energy density on the market.

It's fine as it is but keep in mind these people think we can come up with batteries with higher energy density - the problem will be far worse if that's even physically possible to do - as it is the 1,000 lb batteries can start a near unquenchable chemical fire, imagine if their energy density is doubled!

7
Flarisu 7 points ago +7 / -0

Anti nuclear has got to be one of the most retarded lobbies in all of history.

At least many of them are alive today so we can make fun of how retarded they are.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lol it's not a conspiracy, they outright tell you that they want you deprived of your property, they want you to be beholden to an elite class of capitalists who adhere to a code they made up based on stakeholder capitalism. Conspiracy would imply that they're trying to hide it.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +2 / -1

I was talking about, specifically, the people who claimed it granted immunity - IE, that it was a sterilizing vaccine. From what I understand, no vaccine manufacturer ever claimed that it did - someone or something just invented that part and ran with it and that spread like crazy.

And from where I read it, I think in March 2020 when everyone was starting to nail plexiglass to everything I heard it in a brief somewhere, an outlet that reported on biology papers. I remember from the very early onset that people interested in the vaccine knew full well that it was not going to be sterilizing.

Calm down there, buddy, I know they were claiming it was for harm reduction, I think the more rational standpoint is that the harm reduction to cost ratio ended up being really poor because everyone was freaked out and they threw their clemency out the window for a bit. The money spent on that vaccine regarding harm reduction could have been spent on something deadlier like car accidents if they actually wanted to reduce deaths.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +2 / -1

It seems to me like people read too far into the vaccine and made assumptions and just rolled with them.

The only people claiming it granted immunity were politicians, health ministers etc. Even while the vaccine was being developed, back in the first few months, I recall reading that it was to be what was called a "leaky vaccine" in that it did not prevent transmission - but there was probably some buyer's remorse and political figureheads couldn't just say what you were saying because most people wouldn't understand that.

2
Flarisu 2 points ago +2 / -0

Can't bring it back. I miss it, honestly. Still have it in my list.

But it will never be what it was. Instead we have this place, where a total of 3 people post.

2
Flarisu 2 points ago +2 / -0

Disagree, a strong NDP takes votes from the Libs. Every time the CPC ruled, the NDP was strong.

Jugmeet is one of the weakest leaders they've had in a long time, on track for a four-in-a-row election loss, never even achieving OO, happy to play fourth fiddle to get a semblance of power.

If you want to see the CPC rule, make NDP strong.

9
Flarisu 9 points ago +9 / -0

Lol "twochodes".

Like nobody posts here anymore and now the articles just attack you.

Perhaps it is time for me to finally abandon meta canada.

2
Flarisu 2 points ago +2 / -0

love the technicality. Of course they didn't "print" the money, they just offered a loan to the government by loaning them money that didn't exist and was created digitally, and added to the government's account.

The money was still added to the economy and is still heavily responsible for inflation, but hey, gotta deflecto for the big T, he pays the bills ya know

2
Flarisu 2 points ago +2 / -0

Its not really a conspiracy, Schwab is up front and honest about what he wants to do.

2
Flarisu 2 points ago +2 / -0

Both PP and the BoC are right though.

BoC hides bad financial information mostly because it reflects badly on them, or Freeland told them so.

Bitcoiners are idiots riding a bandwagon on currency used either as a get-rich-quick-ponzi-scheme or to buy drugs.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lift the CMHC PP, I know you can do it.

Making homeowners pay for insurance for the banks has created a nightmare and it needs to end.

3
Flarisu 3 points ago +3 / -0

Was gonna say this. Canadian governments are addicted to income. The anti-tax sentiment is so strong in AB that anyone who threatens to promise a PST gets 0 seats every time.

2
Flarisu 2 points ago +2 / -0

Almost always, explaining Freeland's actions with "Oh, she's an idiotic diversity hire" fully explains them.

Take, for example, her attendance to anti-Trump rallies while visiting the US to negotiate the new USMCA. Devious plan? No, she's just a moron.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's far more likely that Freeland is just an idiot than a nazi. It seems entirely likely that she has no idea even what a nazi is.

3
Flarisu 3 points ago +3 / -0

If the first thing the CBC is going to do is run high-velocity smear campaigns against him, then he should defund them if he wins. State-controlled media shouldn't act like that, and it's about time they learned what happens when they play partisan - they'll be treated like a partisan.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm against him running, but I won't cry if he wins. I just don't think an attack dog like him is going to be so good on the defense.

Prior to this, he could attack easy targets from the leisure of his comfy seat in parliament. Now, he's going to have to defend himself. I've never seen a Polvierre on the back foot.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

Cons are pro-immigration in terms of strict value-based immigrants. Even Harper admitted that the Canadian immigration system (not the refugee system) was designed to bring in Conservative voters.

Immigrants to Canada are skilled, have money, and buy property.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

He's declined in the past, and he's more of a gallery sniper, he is designed as an attack dog. Running the country isn't about making good soundbites in Question Period, which, don't get me wrong, PP is great at, but I think he understands the mantle of leadership is not meant for him.

1
Flarisu 1 point ago +1 / -0

I knew it. I was certain they'd do it, and I could see O-tool squirming every time it came up. Good on you CPC, let's see what you got this time.

-1
Flarisu -1 points ago +1 / -2

I dont think PP will run, and I think he's smart enough to know that he shouldnt.

view more: Next ›