Absolutely. The short version: Chest freerzers are way more efficient because the cold air doesn’t “fall out” as soon as you open them.

That sneaky fuck!

Oooh that’s what you’re saying. Sorry, I misunderstood.

Well, I concluded it from the fact that we can’t see the edge of the phone’s shadow on the shirt, even in the doctored image, so that shadow would need to appear on the ground. But it’s such a minute detail and his work on their faces looks so real that it would definitely fool most people.

In the original image on the left you can see the edge of the phones shadow on the ground though (look under his armpit).

I noticed that too, and then I saw that a part of her phone should also be visible in the shadow on the ground, since it goes over the edge of his shirt. I felt so good for spotting that mistake, like I could even muster 1% of his skills…

AGAIN???

Billionaires were a mistake. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

I also try to say “look it up online” as much as possible in stead of Googling it.

I think that’s a very important point. If you “balance” the EQ like you describe but you boost a frequency band that our ears are more sensitive to and lower a band that we’re less sensitive to by the same amount of dB… The mix might still sound louder than before.

So don’t worry too much about the numbers and heed the great advice given in this thread.

The whole country of japan invented this? That must have been a huge group project

People… What a bunch of bastards

Her argument for being vocal is that her and her generation will have to live with the consequences of our fuckups the longest and hardest. I think that’s pretty valid. Also, she wasn’t “elected by the central climate movement council to be their representative”, if anyone, the media “elected” her and gave her a platform. So maybe be mad at them for not choosing someone “better”?

There are plenty of old white men with respectable titles saying the exact same thing as her. If a “climate change laggard” wants to hear the same message in a deeper voice, they certainly can. For those who can be moved to action at all (and there are definitely many who are “too far gone” in some conspiracy bullshit) she can be effective for many, especially younger people who have to be shaken from their stupor. So I think it’s a bit critical to “tell the girl to shut up”.

I mean the scientists have been loud and clear. So have some politicians, but that’s not a special “story” for the media. So it just happened that a very vocal (at the time) little Girl got a lot of attention, because it seemed so special.

But how does what she is saying distract from the real issue? That’s not an attack, I’m genuinely curious what you think the real issue is and how she distracts from it…

Is it different for the current generation?