• theostermanweekend@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    So…there really has been some massive psy-op done on us all,right? Make us dumber and take us out. Seems like it.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Republicans have consistently voted to reduce funding to public education, etc, yes.

      Specifically to make people dumber and more susceptible to their bullshit. While also increasing the overall supply of cheap labor.

    • uphillbothways@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Climate change will do this. No additional conspiracy required.

      There’s research showing people get incrementally less intelligent as oxygen ratios get worse. There’s also research showing that plants (which really all of our food depends on one way or another) become less nutritious and more sugary/starchy as carbon dioxide ratios rise. That’s before we even factor in things like endocrine disruption from plastic particulate ubiquity and dozens of other pollutant effects.

      We really are the frog in the slowly boiling pot, and even when citing sources on this kind of thing people would rather argue about it. 🤷‍♂️ (I’m not going to bother. Can be looked up easily enough if you’re so inclined.)

      • renormalizer@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        You know that CO2 concentration is at 421 ppm, (0.0421%) up from 280 ppm in 1850? That change is negligible compared to the 21% oxygen. Standing in a crowd or being inside causes a much higher variation of the oxygen concentration. Even moving up 2 meters changes the amount of oxygen molecules per volume by more than that.

      • jayrhacker@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        There’s research showing people get incrementally less intelligent as oxygen ratios get worse.

        And I thought the Lead Generation thing was bad, we’re fucked.

        • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          There is also microplastics and hormone altering substances. But since we put it all out there ourselves it’s less getting fucked and more some type of masturbation.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      So it’s pretty established science that RNA doesn’t become part of your genome right? That’s just not a thing that happens, which is why we don’t have to worry about mRNA vaccines altering our genomes.

      Is that the scientific consensus?

      • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Yes, mRNA does not enter your cell nucleus. And on the other hand, DNA doesn’t leave the cell nucleus. They don’t ever meet in person.

        In theory, proteins could read mRNA, transcribe it into DNA and build it into your DNA. If you find a way to make them do this you can go and collect your Nobel Prize!

        Seriously, when humans are able to do that it would mean we had control over our genome. If that was something currently possible, the Corona vaccine would be the most boring application.

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          But what about reverse transcriptase? Isn’t that a protein that does exactly that, which we’ve known about for decades? Isn’t that what RNA retroviruses use to encode their RNA genome into the host genome?

          What’s going on? I thought you just said the scientific consensus was that RNA doesn’t get encoded into the DNA genome, that it was scientific consensus?

          Should I be taking this as evidence that people declaring a scientific consensus are arrogant, sloppy, and dangerous in their lack of consideration of all the angles?

          Should I really get a nobel prize for pointing out a fact in every high school biology textbook?