- cross-posted to:
- nonpolitical_memes@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- nonpolitical_memes@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
This is dumb. Dinosaurs looks are so diverse. He should have chosen a specific one.
At least narrow it down to clade, like just Theropods or something.
Dinosaur fish!
That’s like saying Huckleberry Finn doesn’t exist. Just because it’s made-up doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. It exists as a concept which billions of people understand.
I think it is pretty clear in the context of the joke that they weren’t saying the concept doesn’t exist they were saying the attributes of the concept doesn’t exist.
Counterpoint: how can Huckleberry Finn exist if our eyes aren’t real?
Nothing is real! I’m the only sentient entity in the universe. Now stop arguing with me, me.
Where we’re going we won’t need eyes to see.
The Sun’s position on the ecliptic at the vernal equinox is not a “concept”, it’s a physical reality, recognised by the International Astronomical Union.
And the astrology signs exist as a concept as recognized by thousands of years of human history dating back to Babylonia 2 BCE. Yes we understand that they’re likely completely bogus, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t exist.
This thread is so dumb. The signs, and the Sun’s progression through them, are as real as anything else in the sky.
Disagree on the semantics. Physical realities are concepts as well. “Energy”, despite being an extremely useful physical measurement, is an abstract concept. “Physical realities” and “concepts” are not mutually exclusive nor antonymous words.
In this case, the Aries/vernal point is a concept used to define coordinate systems using physical measures from Earth.
You are technically correct (the best kind of correct), but the meme is funny anyway.
Oh. I wanna steal this.
You don’t have to steel it. It’s a virtual picture. You can download it and share it with everyone, as often as you like, whenever you want. There’s no cost attached in sharing data other than hardware and energy
Yep, OP stole this meme.
Yep, OP
stoledistributed this meme.You wouldn’t download a meme.
But…you mean…my nfts?
Those are copy protected by nobody wanting them.
this fucking line
Enjoy this FREE* meme
*Messaging and data rates may apply
I like your username. Do you mind sharing where it comes from?
Just rolls off the tongue. Like “cellar door”.
That’s true. It sounds like a children’s book character who’s a woodland creature detective
Thank you for this explanation.
Shit. Then who I have been mailing my money to?
cue the meme acquisition notice here
Np, OP also stole it
I would argue that the zodiac is the proto-science of psychology.
This is people trying to find behavioral patterns
Faulty pattern recognition isn’t something we should be holding on to.
It is the alchemy to the chemistry is what they are saying
So not at all based in science? Interesting as a historical curiosity but nothing more?
Interesting because of the psychological insights into not how all people are, but how people make up theories in general. Same way religion has scientific significance in an anthropological sense.
Perhaps “historical curiosity” was a little obtuse of me.
And how many people are still using Alchemy?
“I turned 5 pounds of lead into gold this morning using this one weird trick that chemists HATE! Subscribe to my premium substack to learn more!”
They told us the history of alchemy in chemistry class, it’s good to know the context.
Yes, but no one credible still uses it. Which was the point I was making.
The problem is that we still don’t have a proper pattern recognition. We could discard all the soft sciences such as Economics, Sociology or Psychology.
What hard sciences could replace economics and sociology? They’re not very rigorous, but they seem to be useful. Psychology also takes some load off psychiatrists
Astrology is also useful.
So is palm reading; for grifters.
Fuck those people who wanna categorize me so they can ignore who I actually am and just put a handle on me.
They want to understand you
No they don’t. They want to put me in a neat little box for easy handling.
Then they should talk to me, rather than rely on generalizations that were created a couple of thousand years ago and revived by new age mystics.
I just did a quick search and the difference between seeing astrology talk about fate vs personality is at least 1200 years apart.
Economic Science is also about fate
Cough… science…cough
I usually say “Ophiuchus”
Which is the official 13th zodiac sign that was removed because 13 is a “bad” number
Actually it was not removed. It just wasn’t on the ecliptic plane before standardisation in 1930.
Constellations on sky change from time to time thanks to axial precession.
Username checks out.
That’s the secret sign that gives you the power of chakra energy transmutation. Richie Blackmore of Deep Purple used this power to become a space trucker.
Turns out you can make up any arbitrary distinctions and they just start existing. The question is if they severe any useful purpose.
I can make zodiac 2.0 exist by adding shoe size to distinguish between regular aquarius and aquarius without platypus (above EU 42 is with). So now the Zodiac 2.0 exists with the same predictive power as 1.0.
Don’t worry we already have Zodiac 2.0
And Zodiac 3.0
I’m disappointed none of these are Github links
This one is like a D&D game.
Except no where near as fun
zodiac 2.0
Already kind of a thing, since the constellations the zodiacs were based on have moved since they were “decided”, and no longer match what people continue to use:
https://www.npr.org/2023/12/31/1222132825/checking-your-2024-horoscope-astronomy-explains-why-your-sign-might-have-changedWhat do you predict for regular Aries this week?
Exercise diligence when putting your shoes on, pay special attention to the laces or you will suffer great sorrow.
Considering how the universe is full of stuff circling around stuff circling around stuff circling around… the zodiac signs have moved over the last couple of millenias.
Yup, position of zodiac constellations has changed, thanks to axial precession
Not that I believe in astrology, but just because the constellations moved doesn’t mean that humans weren’t able to track them. They still form a ring around Earth and the precession of the Zodiacs still occurs.
I believe the point is not that the zodiacs don’t occur at all, it’s that the time you are born is no longer the same time the original zodiac occured.
The fact humans are able to track them is how we know the zodiacs are no longer accurate. According to astrology if you were born on Dec. 1 for example, you’re considered a Sagittarius… except you’re ACTUALLY a Scorpio, due to the constellations shifting.
They weren’t ever accurate. It’s just for fun.
Dinosaurs don’t exist?!
As a zodiac sign, no they do not.
Isn’t it about time we do something about that? I’m going to write to my congressman.
But dragons do?
Botanically, dragons are dinosaurs but not the other way around. Most dinosaurs were not dragons.
Botanically speaking, that’s bananas.
Which is my zodiac sign by the way
No, only ambiguous bones that could be anything and are interpreted to be dinosaurs by old earth creationists making you believe the earth is older than a millennium. Most bones are actually from giants, unicorns and centaurs depending on the color.
Wait only a millennium?
Does this mean Jesus didn’t really exist and his existence is a trick by God to test our faith?
He lived, obviously, but some years after him were counted twice
Actually they do. The zodiac
signconstellation of a day correspond to the constellation over which the sun while be at noon. So you do have a zodiacsignconstellation associated to your day of bird. But depending on how your culture group stars in constellations you might be from a different zodiac. If you want to follow a classical westerner map of the sky, they will be 13 of them.Also, note that the zodiac signs won’t cut the year in equal parts. Some constellations are just bigger than other and the sun path across the sky changes more or less quickly from a day to another depending on the time of the year.
Edit : typo
He made up the sign and constellation Dinosaur.
Yeah, I also didn’t like the wording of the meme. It’s like saying “Santa Claus doesn’t exist”. He does exist, he’s just not a real person, but he exists as a concept and influences millions of people.
He did exist but the time distorted his image and lost any resamblance to an actual person
I’m aware that he’s the basis of the modern Santa Claus (I’ve actually been to Demre), but I would argue that the modern Claus is a separate entity/concept at this point.
deleted by creator
I would go even further : Santa Claus is presented as a actual person that we all know does not exist even though the concept exists. But noone ever pretended that Zodiac are a physical thing, it’s a concept and concepts can’t get more real that being conceptualized.
The constellations are made up too so no they don’t
That is not because something is made up that it does not exist. I made up this message hence it exists.
Cultures group stars together in what is called constellations, hence constellations exist.
Whoa — 13 signs that are not each 1/13 years long??
Check out wikipedia. There is two pages each time one for the zodiac sign and one for the constellation.
And if you go to the french version, the dates at which the sun cross the constellation are each time in the introduction. It’s the date of the first paragraph. The ones the second paragraph is the dates is in astrology, for disambiguation. The comparaison are harder with the english articles.
Whatevs more freaky rock ladies for me
Don’t in crazy. Listen to your elders junior.
While most zodiac signs are inspired by real animals, wtf is an “aquarius”?
In Dutch we don’t use the Latin names for zodiac signs (and we call them “sterrenbeelden”, which means “star images” or maybe “star statues”). Aquarius is “waterman”, which I guess would translate to (surprise) “water man”.
Why? Not sure, but it might be because of Simon Stevin who insisted we use Dutch words for mathematical concepts, and thought up some words like “evenwijdig” (“same distancey”) for “parallel” and “wiskunde” (“certainty knowledge”) for mathematics.
Literally, “water man” is correct. But I would translate it a bit more loosely as “water bearer”.
Most, if not all, names of zodiac signs in Dutchare are literal translations from Latin. But while most people understand that Leo means Lion, how many know Cancer is Latin for crab?
Water bearer makes much more sense, thanks! I did notice the images where a guy carries a jug, but as a kid, I always imagined the water man to be some kind of elemental, and I never consciously challenged that idea. Haha.
Dutch is a strange language.
I agree, and I love how it has these younger words with a vivid etymology, how it shares so many common roots with English, German, the Scandinavian languages, and a serving of French, but also sprinkles of many other languages from its seafaring and otherwise trading history. And I love the grammar rules that allow one to be precise and concise in many things (but there we must definitely bow to German).
Aquarius in English is normally called “the water bearer” so a person carrying water (probably back from the well)
Gemini, Virgo, Libra and Sagittarius also are not animals. Almost half of them isn’t. But you’re technically correct that ‘most’ is. Which is the best kind of correct.
An age. I heard a song about it.
Only half of the Zodiacs are inspired from real animals. Gemini is two humans, Virgo is a virgin woman, Libra is a Weighing Scale, Sagittarius is a Centaur with a bow, Capricorn is a Sea Goat, and Aquarius is… a cup of water, I guess?
You’re missing out on some wild pussy.
Ancient star magic that picks up babes is real and look how boys treat it
That made me spit out my coffee🤣
The actual signs exist (get yourself a planisphere or a stargazing app, find some dark skies, and discover them for yourself!), it’s just all the magic personality nonsense associated with them is bullshit.
The signs don’t exist. It’s just a random collection of stars.
Stars don’t exist, it’s just a random collection of hydrogen.
It’s one thing to say that constellations of stars don’t exist. It’s another thing to say that the constellation “Leo” doesn’t exist because it isn’t a lion and our perception of the spatial relationship of those stars has nothing to do with lions, or with mystical astrological significance.
Those stars are present in space in a certain way. And we can perceive them in our sky in a certain way. But whether those stars are “connected” in any meaningful way, or whether they contain any inherent Lion relevance is purely a creation of human imagination derived from real observable objective phenomena. We could just as easily have said that Leo was Orion, and Orion was Leo, and have been equally correct. It’s subjective. Which doesn’t mean it’s meaningless for us, otherwise art would be meaningless. But it does mean that it isn’t “real” in the same way that gravity or the sun are real. Anything whose continued existence is conditioned on belief isn’t “real” in an objective sense.
Belief can certainly will unreal things into meaningful reality though. But, absent that belief, those things will not exist.
Really this is a discussion centered around the inadequacy of the English word “real.” Perhaps other languages have specific words that would more clearly demonstrate this distinction. Because clearly gravity and Pisces are not both “real” in the same way. The former is objectively real and the latter is subjectively real. And we’re talking past each other by not simply having seperate words that distinguish between those concepts
Except there really isn’t anything more “objective” about all the stars in a direction vs all the hydrogen lumped together in a hot spot. I agree that the dense place fusion is happening is far more interesting and important than a direction of sky that got named after a pretty picture someone imagined a long time ago. That’s a purely subjective distinction though. That direction from Earth, and everything in it, exists without us just as much as a star does. Words just describe the groupings we think are interesting enough to want to communicate about regularly. Sometimes other people like to talk about things we think are silly. That doesn’t make us more “objective” though.
This reminds me of that vsauce video where he says that trogs exist and they’re composed of a tree and whichever dog happens to be closest to it
It makes me feel really dumb when I watch this stuff. The entire time I try to be open minded. I’m left being impressed with the individuals ability to research and articulate an obviously very thoroughly studied topic. They are obviously intelligent, I guess more so than I can relate, because all I am left with from the content is how pointless of a topic it is. No kidding words that we created are a method of communicating within the environment we exist. It’s like the stupid boat example, most generally when referring to the boat people are referring to the one registered, just as he said in the video. The others made from the scraps are boats made from the removed components of that registered vessel. None of this stuff seems complicated to me. He and others even seem aware of the pointless ridiculousness of it when he discusses the eyelash in the fridge example. So I’m left feeling that I’m obviously too stupid to understand the value, or objective, in such a pointless pursuit where everyone already recognizes conditions to words apply to communication while somehow finding value in beating the horse to death and picking it to death, for what I imagine is some goal I just can’t understand.
Smiley faces don’t exist, they’re just a random collection of polygons (that are interpreted by the human brain as being analogous to a specific thing and thus have meaning through comparison…)
That’s like saying people don’t exist and they’re just random collections of particles.
No it’s like saying a person-shaped cloud doesn’t exist.
To describe it as person-shaped is subjective and another viewer may describe the same cloud as butterfly-shaped. Because it’s a subjective interpretation of a static objective object. Like abstract art.
People/animals exist and are “real” in that all of us have agency and a sense of self that is not conditionally dependent on the identical perception of others.
A person-shaped cloud is only “person-shaped” if viewers claim it is. An arrangement of viewable disparate stars is only “Orion” because the Greeks, and now us, decided it was. But I am me and you are you regardless of what anyone else thinks, and always will be.
We aren’t a collection of particles, we are more than the sum of our parts. We have agency and a mind and self-identity. A cloud or a star constellation has none of those things. They are inanimate unfeeling objects that only gain meaning, (astrological, imaginative, or otherwise) when humans/sentient beings ascribe that meaning to them. Human beings, and all living things, have inherent meaning because of their sentience and inherent uniqueness. Which is why genocide is a greater loss than the destruction of a rock - it’s the permanent death of unique living beings.
Such a romantic~
Pfffft if none of them exist then how did the Rat play a flute while standing on the head of the Ox to impress the Jade Emperor and become the first zodiac sign?
Checkmate, atheist.
