The old War of the Worlds movie has a brilliant atomic bomb sequence. The mushroom cloud was created in miniature with practical effects, using explosives on top of an empty oil drum. Really worth seeing.
I watched Oppenheimer out of curiosity because I heard Nolan didn't use CGI for the atomic bomb. All movie I waited for that money shot, and instead of bringing out a buxom blonde stripper in a bikini, he brought out this one legged 50 year old midget. I don't even know what the rest of the movie was about. Dudes talking. I just wanted the mother of all explosions. This should have been a Michael Bay film.
One of the nastiest aspects of our current culture is this tendency to wish forced sodomy on prison inmates. Qe are too cowardly to give violent criminals what they deserve, so we fantasize about outsourcing justice to prison gangs.
The left loves to mock right-wing religious doomsday preachers for confidently claiming to know the date of the Rapture, only to be proven wrong again and again, and those who take action based on these predictions.
I agree, it's funny.
But the secular left has built its own doomsday religion. Extinction Rebellion, climate catastrophism, and the "Climate Clock" are no less absurd. They all warn of a looming End Times, a short window for some kind of salvation, and even engage in public rituals of repentance while calling out heretics to be shamed and silenced.
Some of these True Believers are even behaviorally sterilizing themselves because they believe the future is so doomed that their children will only suffer.
This isn't some tiny isolated congregation following a quacky renegade preacher. This is a mainstream political movement.
Plaque removal is not the only purpose of toothpaste. Tartar control, application of fluoride, sensitivity reduction, and breath freshening are their other uses. Also, 49.2% vs. 50.3% does not sound significant.
FYI toothpaste doesn’t do anything
One clinical trial actually found less plaque removal when toothpaste was used
Just brush your kids’ teeth without toothpaste
It’s easier for everyone when their mouths aren’t full of foam
It is quite possible that miscarriage is not described here. It may be a prolapse. Hebrew is often ambiguous.
What this would *actually* produce is the jealous husband's being forced to cease his jealousy. (Unless the prolapse actually occurred, I guess.)
@HellenicVibes It is unclear whether miscarriage is referenced here. It may be a prolapsed bladder being described.
In any case, this is a curse, not an actual abortifaceant. She is being made to drink dusty water. The actual social effect is to stay her husband's suspicions.
That this ridiculous chart was produced by a tenured medievalist is yet another mark against modern academia. Its mocking tone, obvious exaggerations and lack of nuance or even basic understanding, and overall unprofessionalism should have wrecked its creator's reputation.
A decision tree on when it is permissible to have marital sex according to medieval sources from "Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe" by James A. Brundage (it works out to somewhere around five times a month):
One problem I'm not sure Christianity has ever directly dealt with is that there is now plenty of evidence that our ancestors have always reproduced the way we currently do, and no evidence for the supernatural reproduction about which the Fathers speculate.
@_sevatar They have the same attitude toward laughter and food. Perfect men don't laugh and barely eat. Real Christians sleep one hour a day, say the Desert Fathers. Somewhere in the 3rd c., Paul's austere but human praxis got replaced with something inhuman.
@_sevatar It is kind of a big deal. Their approach to sexual ethics begins with the premise that "passion" and "delectation" are pernicious add-ons not essential to the act because, once upon a time, babies came from the magic stork.
@saturnine_grace For ethical praxis, that renders it irrelevant. My point stands: "Imagine sex were completely different" is not a sound basis for sexual ethics.
And I don't think the author of Genesis thought he was describing another universe, as he's clearly concerned with the facts of life.
@Albert_Berg Humans are mammals. All mammals are either male or female. A sexless being neither male or female, whatever it is, is not human.
But in any case, we don't live in sexless Eden, so sexless Eden is morally irrelevant.
@Albert_Berg It's also clearly at odds with the actual Genesis narrative, which is an etiological myth meant to explain the facts of life: Why childbirth is dangerous, why snakes don't have legs, why men toil for food and wear clothes, etc.
@Albert_Berg So Adam and Eve were not human but then became human and were injected into this world and its biological processes.
I suppose that is the only way to reconcile the narrative with what we know of prehistory. It's comfortably unfalsifiable.
@ClassicalTheis The creator of the chart was of course disingenuous, but much of this was in fact enforced, at least on paper, for a long time. It is not out of place to ask what that means for us.