home.social

#stupidquestions — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #stupidquestions, aggregated by home.social.

fetched live
  1. @Long_live_rock_n_roll
    The picture appears to show some half-human/half canine hybrid creatures. If this crossing were continued (gradually increasing the dog DNA contribution) then after how many generations would the females/bitches no longer be required to wear a bra?
    If only Adam Rutherford was still on Curious Cases.
    #JustWondering
    #Bowie #DNA #genetics #ScienceGoneWrong #StupidQuestions #AdamRutherford

  2. @Long_live_rock_n_roll
    The picture appears to show some half-human/half canine hybrid creatures. If this crossing were continued (gradually increasing the dog DNA contribution) then after how many generations would the females/bitches no longer be required to wear a bra?
    If only Adam Rutherford was still on Curious Cases.
    #JustWondering
    #Bowie #DNA #genetics #ScienceGoneWrong #StupidQuestions #AdamRutherford

  3. @Long_live_rock_n_roll
    The picture appears to show some half-human/half canine hybrid creatures. If this crossing were continued (gradually increasing the dog DNA contribution) then after how many generations would the females/bitches no longer be required to wear a bra?
    If only Adam Rutherford was still on Curious Cases.
    #JustWondering
    #Bowie #DNA #genetics #ScienceGoneWrong #StupidQuestions #AdamRutherford

  4. @Long_live_rock_n_roll
    The picture appears to show some half-human/half canine hybrid creatures. If this crossing were continued (gradually increasing the dog DNA contribution) then after how many generations would the females/bitches no longer be required to wear a bra?
    If only Adam Rutherford was still on Curious Cases.
    #JustWondering
    #Bowie #DNA #genetics #ScienceGoneWrong #StupidQuestions #AdamRutherford

  5. 2. #StupidQuestions

    "Testing the waters: can pumping chemicals into the ocean help stop global heating?"

    No. Only reducing emissions to zero would slow down global heating, which is anyway out of control by now.

    Next stoopid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  6. 2. #StupidQuestions

    "Testing the waters: can pumping chemicals into the ocean help stop global heating?"

    No. Only reducing emissions to zero would slow down global heating, which is anyway out of control by now.

    Next stoopid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  7. 2. #StupidQuestions

    "Testing the waters: can pumping chemicals into the ocean help stop global heating?"

    No. Only reducing emissions to zero would slow down global heating, which is anyway out of control by now.

    Next stoopid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  8. 2. #StupidQuestions

    "Testing the waters: can pumping chemicals into the ocean help stop global heating?"

    No. Only reducing emissions to zero would slow down global heating, which is anyway out of control by now.

    Next stoopid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  9. 2. #StupidQuestions

    "Testing the waters: can pumping chemicals into the ocean help stop global heating?"

    No. Only reducing emissions to zero would slow down global heating, which is anyway out of control by now.

    Next stoopid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  10. 2. Today on #StupidQuestions:

    "‘The trend is irreversible’: has (country XYZ) shattered the link between economic growth and high emissions?"

    No. If I had a nickel for every time I read that headline...

    But in the end, it never ends up being true.

    Next stoopid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  11. 2. Today on #StupidQuestions:

    "‘The trend is irreversible’: has (country XYZ) shattered the link between economic growth and high emissions?"

    No. If I had a nickel for every time I read that headline...

    But in the end, it never ends up being true.

    Next stoopid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  12. 2. Today on #StupidQuestions:

    "‘The trend is irreversible’: has (country XYZ) shattered the link between economic growth and high emissions?"

    No. If I had a nickel for every time I read that headline...

    But in the end, it never ends up being true.

    Next stoopid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  13. 2. Today on #StupidQuestions:

    "‘The trend is irreversible’: has (country XYZ) shattered the link between economic growth and high emissions?"

    No. If I had a nickel for every time I read that headline...

    But in the end, it never ends up being true.

    Next stoopid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  14. 2. Today on #StupidQuestions:

    "‘The trend is irreversible’: has (country XYZ) shattered the link between economic growth and high emissions?"

    No. If I had a nickel for every time I read that headline...

    But in the end, it never ends up being true.

    Next stoopid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  15. 3. #StupidQuestions:

    "Hamburg & Schleswig-Holstein wollen bei der Entwicklung eines Kernfusionsreaktors mitmischen. Hilft das dem Ziel, bis 2050 klimaneutral zu werden?"

    Nein, weil Kernfusion keine Technologie, sondern ein fetischistischer Hirnfurz ist.

    Next stupid question please.
    taz.de/Energieversorgung-der-Z

  16. 3. #StupidQuestions:

    "Hamburg & Schleswig-Holstein wollen bei der Entwicklung eines Kernfusionsreaktors mitmischen. Hilft das dem Ziel, bis 2050 klimaneutral zu werden?"

    Nein, weil Kernfusion keine Technologie, sondern ein fetischistischer Hirnfurz ist.

    Next stupid question please.
    taz.de/Energieversorgung-der-Z

  17. 3. #StupidQuestions:

    "Hamburg & Schleswig-Holstein wollen bei der Entwicklung eines Kernfusionsreaktors mitmischen. Hilft das dem Ziel, bis 2050 klimaneutral zu werden?"

    Nein, weil Kernfusion keine Technologie, sondern ein fetischistischer Hirnfurz ist.

    Next stupid question please.
    taz.de/Energieversorgung-der-Z

  18. 3. #StupidQuestions:

    "Hamburg & Schleswig-Holstein wollen bei der Entwicklung eines Kernfusionsreaktors mitmischen. Hilft das dem Ziel, bis 2050 klimaneutral zu werden?"

    Nein, weil Kernfusion keine Technologie, sondern ein fetischistischer Hirnfurz ist.

    Next stupid question please.
    taz.de/Energieversorgung-der-Z

  19. 3. #StupidQuestions:

    "Hamburg & Schleswig-Holstein wollen bei der Entwicklung eines Kernfusionsreaktors mitmischen. Hilft das dem Ziel, bis 2050 klimaneutral zu werden?"

    Nein, weil Kernfusion keine Technologie, sondern ein fetischistischer Hirnfurz ist.

    Next stupid question please.
    taz.de/Energieversorgung-der-Z

  20. 4. #StupidQuestions:

    "Will electronic tagging for cattle save the Amazon rainforest?"

    No.

    Next stupid question please.
    ft.com/content/1de50285-39eb-4

  21. 4. #StupidQuestions:

    "Will electronic tagging for cattle save the Amazon rainforest?"

    No.

    Next stupid question please.
    ft.com/content/1de50285-39eb-4

  22. 4. #StupidQuestions:

    "Will electronic tagging for cattle save the Amazon rainforest?"

    No.

    Next stupid question please.
    ft.com/content/1de50285-39eb-4

  23. 4. #StupidQuestions:

    "Will electronic tagging for cattle save the Amazon rainforest?"

    No.

    Next stupid question please.
    ft.com/content/1de50285-39eb-4

  24. 4. #StupidQuestions:

    "Will electronic tagging for cattle save the Amazon rainforest?"

    No.

    Next stupid question please.
    ft.com/content/1de50285-39eb-4

  25. Klimakram 18/11/25

    1. Aus der Rubrik #StupidQuestions:

    "AI is guzzling energy for slop content – could it be reimagined to help the climate?"

    Nein, weil der Kapitalismus ja keine Bedürfniswirtschaft ist: we don't get what we need, but capital does.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  26. Klimakram 18/11/25

    1. Aus der Rubrik #StupidQuestions:

    "AI is guzzling energy for slop content – could it be reimagined to help the climate?"

    Nein, weil der Kapitalismus ja keine Bedürfniswirtschaft ist: we don't get what we need, but capital does.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  27. Klimakram 18/11/25

    1. Aus der Rubrik #StupidQuestions:

    "AI is guzzling energy for slop content – could it be reimagined to help the climate?"

    Nein, weil der Kapitalismus ja keine Bedürfniswirtschaft ist: we don't get what we need, but capital does.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  28. Klimakram 18/11/25

    1. Aus der Rubrik #StupidQuestions:

    "AI is guzzling energy for slop content – could it be reimagined to help the climate?"

    Nein, weil der Kapitalismus ja keine Bedürfniswirtschaft ist: we don't get what we need, but capital does.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  29. Klimakram 18/11/25

    1. Aus der Rubrik #StupidQuestions:

    "AI is guzzling energy for slop content – could it be reimagined to help the climate?"

    Nein, weil der Kapitalismus ja keine Bedürfniswirtschaft ist: we don't get what we need, but capital does.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  30. 3. #StupidQuestions:

    "Less arguing, more action: will Brazil’s unorthodox approach to Cop30 work?"

    No, because the fundamental structure of the UNFCCC-process means that it is incapable of delivering real results.

    Next stupid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  31. 3. #StupidQuestions:

    "Less arguing, more action: will Brazil’s unorthodox approach to Cop30 work?"

    No, because the fundamental structure of the UNFCCC-process means that it is incapable of delivering real results.

    Next stupid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  32. 3. #StupidQuestions:

    "Less arguing, more action: will Brazil’s unorthodox approach to Cop30 work?"

    No, because the fundamental structure of the UNFCCC-process means that it is incapable of delivering real results.

    Next stupid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  33. 3. #StupidQuestions:

    "Less arguing, more action: will Brazil’s unorthodox approach to Cop30 work?"

    No, because the fundamental structure of the UNFCCC-process means that it is incapable of delivering real results.

    Next stupid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20

  34. 3. #StupidQuestions:

    "Less arguing, more action: will Brazil’s unorthodox approach to Cop30 work?"

    No, because the fundamental structure of the UNFCCC-process means that it is incapable of delivering real results.

    Next stupid question please.
    theguardian.com/environment/20