This is a depiction of John Rawl’s “Veil of Ignorance” concept. Where to properly considered whether a society is just, you must consider that may be placed in any part of it.

I don’t think deadpan humor is funny. 😕

If they were physicists they’d hold the tip of the handle with a pinching gesture, then pull the hammer back to horizontal and let it drop. Swinging with a perfect arc it would thud into the pope’s head with just enough force to hurt anyone who was still alive, and get a response.

However seeing as they’re still using a hammer to test for brain activity - we can assume the Catholic Church isn’t that friendly to science or something.

It is now understood that you like big, young dicks (and NOT small boomer dicks). This is objectively a great set-up for the joke you’re absolutely about to make. I look forward to your objectively funny response.

I hope to learn about the comedy and humor from you, as you’ve set up this joke or pratfall perfectly. I look forwards to reading the definitively funny thing you have to say in reply.

Did you know there’s only one type of humor: yours (and it’s just for this particular mood you’re in right now) …and don’t let anyone tell you any different!

If they do, you’ll at least know they’re wrong. It’s a huge mistake to think that what we laugh at or feel is funny, changes with mood, timing, approach, the people around us, or the kind of day/life we’ve had, or to think humor is subjective in any way.

Humor is yes or no. It’s objective, it’s a science or maths style subject. People who don’t think so are just plain and demonstrably incorrect.

Donald Duck’s girlfriend really wants it right? I mean, we all agree that much is obviously? Flirting is her one mode of existence. She’s desperate.

Hope OP gets one of the slow cancers.

Just what kind of person uses issues of global poverty and starvation to do a crypto scam. Dude is a human vacancy. What a low IQ chudhole.

The images of missing children are actually the carton bragging.

When referencing news media in this way, it’s important to actually include the name of the publication or source so that people can go verify it themselves. You’re not leaving them in a no mans land of uncertainty, unsure of what’s true or not, and not opening yourself up to accusations of dishonesty or spreading misinformation.

In this case, and in others referencing print and written media, the name of the publication, title of the article, and the date it apprared would be included.

So it would be by Steff Chavez, published in The Financial Times, on Jan 15 2025 (the title of the article is redundant information as it appears in the comic).

Optionally a link people can visit might be handy:

https://www.ft.com/content/973421a3-c96a-4038-96c6-725af5aa6124

That way you’re showing people what the political reality is for certain, rather than leaving them in doubt or uncertain about what was actually published. But also, it keeps you honest too.

Still don’t understand why these comics get ao many downvotes, this one us clearly about qhen “Radical Centrists” and free market liberals who claim to be leftwing compromise with faacists and right wing nutters.

I don’t know if it’s a brag when the relationship is that transactional.

The Libre Office Suite is better, and Free Open Source Software (FOSS).

Docking procedure complete!

I think they tend to place a device for scale, then take multiple photos. That answers most questions, and they can recreate the scene/positions from those photos and videos.

I imagine some places are even doing 3D photogrammetric scans - digital scans of crime scenes that are automatically receated in a 3D model with accurate textures. This technology is after all already being used by game developers and other industries.

One of you is treating your mental health conditions.

Sewer mutants cooking up some grub.

Anyone else have no idea why this is so downvoted?

Who put Lysenko in a position of power?

Look bud, I don’t have all day to teach you this shit. I’m not your mommy or daddy or the history teacher at the local school, so just stop bothering me with your lack of knowledge about this.

Lysenko was elected in 1945 to the ruling committee of the USSR Academy of Sciences—the top scientific institution in the country—numerous scientists spoke out against him, citing his poor scientific reputation [7]. Over the next several years, Lysenko was criticized numerous times, and there were even steps taken to open an institute of genetics [4]. From 1946-1947, up to 1.5 million people died within the Soviet Union due to famine [18]. Lysenko’s nadir during this period was reached in April of 1947, when he was harshly criticized by Russian chemist Yuri Zhdanov, who highlighted Lysenko’s failures. He pointed out the destructive manner in which Lysenko had demonized geneticists, and argued that monopolies in science inhibit advancement [4]. Zhdanov’s words were particularly dangerous for Lysenko, given that the chemist was from a family with close ties to Stalin (e.g., Zhdanov went on to eventually marry Stalin’s only daughter) and he was a member of the powerful Central Committee of the Communist Party [13].

He was a conman, go look it all up yourself. Learn to google.

I feel you don’t know much about these subjects.

Trofim Lysenko

The downfall of Soviet genetics and agriculture occurred due to the alignment of numerous social, economic, scientific, meteorological, and political factors. No single person can bear complete blame for the events, but a crucial actor in the story was Trofim Lysenko. Lysenko was born to a Ukrainian…

https://www.storybehindthescience.org/lysenkoism

I also think you’re arguing just to argue rather than doing something more useful. As I said earlier, neither Mao or Stalin were aiming for a famine, where as Hitler was most definitely aiming for a mass genocide. So your comparison is full of shit.

Bye.

Past the numbers I told you about.

I’m done here - you’re having a conversation with yourself at this point. I addressed the topic I addressed (the deaths from starvation Lysenkoism caused).