Honestly I think the scariest part of all this is how it shows that all it takes to drive someone off the deep end is for someone or something that person trusts to merely agree with whatever idea pops into a person's head. I guess it makes sense, we use reinforcement to learn what we think is true and often have bad ideas, but still, I'd always been under the impression that humans were a bit more mentally resilient than that.

Not having any fat, muscle or even skin for warmth, maybe they get cold without the added wind protection and insulation?

I suspect you might get examples of things that sort of resemble a later discovery that someone believing the religion in question might interpret as divine revelation of that thing. Some of the christians in my family like to take the "let there be light" thing and claim that it's talking about the big bang, anecdotally.

I think I remember some religion out there having a concept that resembles microorganisms, before such organisms were discovered, I think Jainism but I'm not confident about that.

I did not say "revolutions cannot change government", I had said that revolutions have thus far not created a stable and successful socialist system (otherwise, and example of such a country ought to exist or at least have existed as a prominent part of history, I don't know about you but I cannot think of any current or former government the world over that I would find "satisfactory" so to speak). I'd argue that the exact same kind of issue exists: in a violent revolution, power ultimately goes to charismatic leaders able to gain a following and material support, which is more likely to lead to dictatorship than anything else unless one gets very lucky with the person in question.

Of course, an obvious response to what I've said there is that a revolution that does not create a satisfactory state may still be worthwhile if what it creates is at least still better than what came before, even if insufficient. If one was to allow for that though, then reform is still viable, because reforms have been able to achieve improvements before as well.

Consider labor unions for example. Organized labor in itself does not constitute a revolution; a capitalist country in which labor unions form generally remains with the same government, the same owners of it's various industries and ultimately, still capitalism. However, such unions have at times been able to make economic gains and exert influence on industrial policy for the general workforce. As such, while capitalism with labor unions isn't socialism, it's closer to socialism than capitalism without labor unions, and such I think they're worth encouraging even if organizing an industry or going on strike doesn't result in tearing the whole system down and rebuilding it from scratch. And they aren't the only example of such a thing.

One might point out that their efforts aren't always peaceful, but I don't think I said that it had to be peaceful reform, or if I did somewhere I didn't intend to combine those terms. My position is also not that violent revolution has no place, for that matter. My position, ultimately, is for reform with the threat of violence as a last resort. Actually using it is something that I think is very risky and more liable to do harm than good, and thus I don't prefer it, but I think that a reform movement should have the capacity for it as a sort of nuclear option, so that it's demands for changes cannot be safely ignored.

Considering that an adequately socialistic government to avoid the consolidation power back down into a small group again hasn't really existed on a significant scale or for a significant length of time, saying that reform has never worked is technically true, but a bit misleading, because by the same standard neither violent revolution nor any other technique for changing a government has ever worked either. When trying to achieve something that hasn't been managed before, and is therefore clearly difficult, it would seem a bit premature to leave any option to get closer off the table.

Faith of the gallbladder wouldn't have the same ring to it.

I discovered it from the steam page actually, the bit lower down with community posts, someone else had linked it after showing one of their custom plants. the link they'd shared that I got it from is here: https://github.com/A-xesey/Flora-Editor-Reconstruction

And a few minutes later, I find some in the wild, so I guess that works too

Literally how could we? It's a big rock, it has no ecosystem whatsoever, and any effort to live there someday would require environmentally sealed and radiation resistant structures. Degrading what it does to earth would require significantly altering it's mass or orbit, which would require an amount of energy that isn't in the cards for a long time to come even optimistically.

well Ive been wrong, Ive been under the impression for awhile that it was a room for doing art in, for when relatively rich people that can afford rooms for random things happen to also be artists.

If anything, the idea there is a purpose to existence ought to be scarier than the idea that there isnt one. If you have an objective, the possibility of failure exists.

Ah yes let me just go back in time and have myself born in a different country, silly me.