you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 44 points 1 year ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (14 children)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (11 children)

    The paper from 1942 was meant to establish long standing scientific curiosity about the topic, you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (10 children)
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    I agree with you, but you have to put forward a point that doesn’t stand atop misunderstanding a citation, or else I’ll name you another foodstuff

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    Wait, goober is a foodstuff?

    ???

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Another name for a peanut. Not sure how it became a soft pejorative, but I’m a fan

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    What?

    I've literally never heard of goober as meaning peanut.

    I thought it basically just meant 'glob' when describing a physical thing, and when describing a person, basically the same as 'derpy', like uh, silly, absent minded, something like that, and is mostly meant in an at least semi endearing way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It’s a borrowed African word. Borrowed in the 1800s. Borrowed by Americans. Borrowed. But it eventually shifted at some point in the last century to the definition most people are familiar with, though I can’t figure out how or why.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments