putoelquelolea

joined 1 year ago
[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 hours ago

All that saying means is that some people are willing to change their moral compass according to situational convenience

[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago

Se ve que tiene setecientas primaveras

[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

Agreed. People don't take into account the fact that historians have existed for a long time and probably would have noticed a person as revolutionary as the one mentioned in the gospels - miracles or not. The Romans were excellent record keepers, and that is how we know for a fact - for example - that Herod's timeline does not jibe with the virgin birth myth, nor did the Roman survey methodology jibe with the Bethleham journey myth, to cite two examples among so many others

[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago (3 children)
[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 15 points 11 months ago (9 children)

By truth do you mean that Santa doesn't exist, that the whole Christmas celebration is an adaptation of Roman pagan traditions, or that Jesus never existed?

[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago

Coincido con wiikifox. Si quieres rolling release, quédate con Arch. No hay distribución que se le compare

[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

An effective vaccine reduces numbers across the board. As mentioned in the article you cited, "Vaccine effectiveness is a measure of how well vaccination protects people against health outcomes such as infection, symptomatic illness, hospitalization, and death."

That is, fewer people get sick, and fewer sick people develop symptoms, and fewer symptomatic people are hospitalized, and fewer hospitalized people die.

It seems that @HMH would like all those numbers reduced to zero, which is obviously impossible

[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Every economist has a model.

And every economist who has implemented his model in a given country, will be able to explain - in great detail - why it didn't work

[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I love you, man!

[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

You know what? You're right. “π r square, not. Round, π r, too.” would have worked remarkably better. 😜

I truly regret the time I wasted answering you, as I will never get that back…

I mean ... you have been arguing about geometry puns. What kind of ROI were you expecting?

[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Surrealism doesn’t mean what you think it means.

Uhhh, it's a quote from HHGttG

Also I still maintain that you didn’t understand my original joke, otherwise you would have called my explanation “unnecessary”, not “poor”.

OK, if you say so

Now, I didn’t read your comment as a joke, and I still don’t. I read it as a pun only, and I’m still very confused by its execution.

Do you get confused a lot? I'm obviously impressed by your profound knowledge of geometry, but you may not have reached the part where you can use π to calculate the area of a circle: πr2, which is pronounced like pie are squared. Only pie are not squared, pie are round. Did ya get it now, honey? (Side note: It's not pronounced pie are two. Maybe that's why you still don't get it)

I think you should just give up and go to sleep now. That's what I'm going to do

[–] putoelquelolea@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Let me break it down for you:

  1. You posted a humorous meme that was easily understood
  2. I made a comment with a different joke along the same lines (Get it? Lines? Geometry?)
  3. You then explained (poorly) your original joke, thinking that I hadn't been able to grasp the surrealism of the underlying metaphor
  4. I made fun of your obtuse (See? More geometry there) "explanation"
  5. You still thought I hadn't understood and gave me a woosh
  6. Right back atcha
  7. Now you have gone back to explaining your joke again
  8. Why are you so angry? Lighten up
view more: next ›