• lath@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    I think we might want to revisit wild theories such as our ancestors actually being martians who genocided the dinos in order to move over from their dying planet. They’re starting to make much more sense lately…

  • ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    3 days ago

    the maths doesn’t add up, though. three-quarters of the earth’s land is already covered by ocean.

    if the same proportion of land has permanently dried up, that means that at least half the ocean floor globally is exposed to the sky!

        • cravl@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yes. It is part of the surface, but it is not “land” by the common definition.

          • ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            what is the definition of “common definition”, though? that’s a wishy-washy stand, is it not?

            the first dictionary definition of the word states that land is the solid part of the surface of the earth, which is contrary to your distinction between “land” and “surface”. that’s a more solid and substantial position, is it not?

              • ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                well, i’ve provided a bonafide source. whereas you’ve provided only your opinion.

                i’m not sure from whence this righteous outrage arises.

                i would be happy to understand any issue in my source or any contrary sources that support your opinion that the seabed is definitely not “land”.