xkbx

joined 1 year ago
[–] xkbx@startrek.website 5 points 1 month ago

Are those coffee stains or are you just spilly to see me

[–] xkbx@startrek.website 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

oh that chicken fucker would

[–] xkbx@startrek.website 9 points 2 months ago

I feel like it would be one of those high AC/low damage roll fights

[–] xkbx@startrek.website 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It’s the same combination on my luggage!

[–] xkbx@startrek.website 6 points 2 months ago

So the issue is that there are SO many factors. Bones have nothing to do with it, it’s more about genetics. Things like myostatin proteins limit muscle growth. Animals that have mutated disruptions to the development of the protein have higher muscle mass - look up Belgium Blue cattle, you’ll see some BIG cows there.

Steroids help you recover more quickly, making it easier for you to work out more, and therefore put on more muscle. Not everyone is going to look like Arnold or Channing Tatum, your muscle distribution is going to vary entirely on your genetics, but you can absolutely look like a monster. You might just put on mass easier on your quads and your chest than your shoulders and calves, for example. Hyper-focusing on these elements will also warp your perspective. Sizes for gloves are arbitrary, so you might also be severely distorting your self-image. There’s a lot of different factors to consider.

[–] xkbx@startrek.website 7 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Your bones got nothing to do with it. If you pushed your training and dieting to the maximum, you could look like the Hulk… if you started to abuse steroids. Else-wise, the most you’ll do is look fit.

[–] xkbx@startrek.website 18 points 2 months ago

Get in the depression region of collective human consciousness, Shinji

[–] xkbx@startrek.website 9 points 2 months ago

Ah, the art of bushit-o

[–] xkbx@startrek.website 1 points 2 months ago

I was saying temperature, not spiciness

[–] xkbx@startrek.website 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The argument still stands; god is either incapable of creating a universe without suffering where you can still derive meaning, or is not willing to create one.

The only potential explanation I could see is the absolutes in which we set things. The paradox of an ultimate being is flawed (could god microwave a burrito so hot that not even he could eat it?) because it presumes that the being exists within the confines of two opposing absolutes cannot coexist; something either is, or isn’t. However, if some being would be considered supreme in our universe, it could be because it exists outside of its confinements, meaning that conflicting realities (paradoxes) are possible - the burrito is both not too hot for god to eat, while at the same still being too hot for him to eat. It’s just not possible for us to comprehend because in our understanding of reality, something cannot exist simultaneously as the opposite of what we’ve recognized it as. It would mean it either no longer fits the definition, or reality exists in a way that’s so much more complicated at the same time.

It’s often expressed in multiverses in a lot of fictional settings; a universe where god made a burrito so hot not even he could eat it, and a parallel universe where he could, and both universes are both observable and interactable with god. But even then, it’s kinda brain-melting, like some kind of nuclear-hot brain burrito.

I’m sorry, I’m kind of hungry.

[–] xkbx@startrek.website 7 points 2 months ago

That title strained my peepers

Though I’m glad they’re making a recovery, I’m also in favour of arming the birds to help them fight back

[–] xkbx@startrek.website 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I went to bed at 10pm after cleaning my bathroom and putting away my clothes. I woke up 5 hours later with a cold. No regerts

view more: ‹ prev next ›