The International Astronomical Union (IAU) defined in August 2006 that, in the Solar System, a planet is a celestial body that:
- is in orbit around the Sun,
- has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape), and
- has “cleared the neighbourhood” around its orbit.
That reminds me of the attitude a lot of Democrats had during 2016 primaries about Trump. “He’s such a horrible candidate, Clinton will definitely win against him. Let’s make sure he wins the primary.”
deleted by creator
A not totally incompetent trainer of a dead horse would not be stunned how bad the dead horse does.
It is obviously intentionally done to mimic the ritual sacrifice of the two goats on Yom Kippur, the day of atonement. Two goats were presented to the high priest, one was chosen by casting lots to be sacrificed on the altar and the other was cast into the wilderness, purifying the people of Israel of their sins. In the story, Jesus plays the role of both goats.
Three mirrors. A tri-fold mirror works great.
Again, they did exactly this last new year.
https://www.newsweek.com/green-day-maga-trump-new-years-eve-1856855
I am aware of that, considering that the article I linked is a direct response to that claim. If you notice the article you link does not quote Biden, but an anonymous source, and when reporters asked Biden he said: “I don’t have any plans on one term.”
He never had plans to only run one term.
“No, I never have,” Biden said when asked by a reporter on Wednesday if those discussions were taking place. “I don’t have any plans on one term.”
What do you mean he never corrected anyone? I already provided a link with him and his campaign explicitly saying that he had no intention of only running one term.
The window for this to work would have been before the primaries.
by heavily implying he’d be a one term “caretaker” president
He never said that. Unnamed people that had no authority to say it did, but he and his campaign explicitly said he had no intention of only running one term.
We’ve known that birds were descended from dinosaurs for a long time. Best I can tell, it was first proposed in the 1800’s, largely abandoned by the early 1900’s and then revived in the 1970’s. It was not new information about the lineage of birds that caused us to start saying ‘birds are dinosaurs’, but a different method of classification: Cladistics.
We had known that birds are descended from dinosaurs well before the general public and the majority of paleontologists starting saying “birds are dinosaurs”. So simply saying that “we discovered that birds are descended from dinosaurs” is not sufficient to answering your question.
Traditional taxonomy allows for paraphyletic groups, meaning that not all of the descendants of the most recent common ancestor of the group are required to be in that group. So in this case, even though it was known that birds are descended from dinosaurs, they continued to be considered two separate groups, with dinosaurs being a paraphyletic group. Birds were known first, dinosaurs were later discovered and were considered a distinct group, then the link between the the two groups was discovered, but how they were grouped did not immediately change. That birds were not considered to be dinosaurs was a rather arbitrary effect based on how they were discovered and not on any scientific basis.
One book on dinosaurs from 1997 wrote:
So why the change? There is a trend in science to prefer cladistic classification, which requires every group to be a clade, meaning that all descendants of the most recent common ancestor of a group are in the group. This effectively means that paraphyletic grouping is being abandoned. So with cladistic taxonomy birds are dinosaurs.
There are other traditionally paraphyletic groups that are still in the process of changing. For example traditionally monkeys were a paraphyletic group, but any clade that includes all monkeys necessarily includes the apes, so in cladistics apes are monkeys. Though, you will still hear many people say ‘apes are not monkeys’. Fish was also a paraphyletic group, which included all vertebrates except tetrapods, but of course in cladistics, tetrapods are fish.
Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as “at the same time too strong and too weak”. On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism
It’s not a bug, it’s a feature.
The late, legendarily brutal campaign consultant Lee Atwater explains how Republicans can win the vote of racists without sounding racist themselves:
You start out in 1954 by saying, “N*****, n*****, n*****.” By 1968 you can’t say “n*****”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “N*****, n*****.”
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/exclusive-lee-atwaters-infamous-1981-interview-southern-strategy/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
This is the foundation of the current Republican party. There is nothing redeemable.
Jesus committed a terrorist attack against the Jewish temple.
If you are referring to the gemini ai model that identified a deadly mushroom as a button mushroom, then that is also google.
Your link includes part of Russia.
It has the bill of rights but not all constitutional amendments. Among other things, in Trumps bible, slavery is still legal and women can’t vote, just the way they want it.