WhatsThatNoize

That sort of acceptance of another person for who they are is SO rare on television and especially on "Reality" TV.

Props to that guy. Seriously.

I know this question is a little on-the-nose, but it's literally all I could think of reading your post...

• Why can't he step out, take a shit on the side of the road, then walk back to the car which probably only moved 30 feet in that time?

I mean, that's what I'd do. I guess if I had a more philosophical question, it would be...

• Will he return to the Ukraine?

Gods above bless your father and your family for their good humor under such circumstances.

He shouldn't feel any shame at all for leaving - please repeat that to him. Any sane person with a family would do everything in their power to secure their family first before even considering turning back around to fight.

You can't fight effectively with your mind in two places.

And ah, the morning shit routine explains it haha... gosh I really hope the three of them get some relief soon. Keep us posted please!

Side note: I share his wife's sentiment. I really, truly hope Putin and his ilk all suck on the business end of a barrel, and soon.

Dr. Krauss, I both agree and disagree with you on a lot of things and please understand that I hold you in the highest regard. I have two questions for you that operate on the following assumptions:

Your book explains the Universe's origin coming from a quantum-vacuum state, correct? The physicist in me likes this primarily because it allows us to make more precise theories concerning quantum states relative to a zero-point energy (I assume that's what it would be used for, although my grasp of the physics is... poor). However, the philosopher in me says: "This is not truly 'nothing' in either a metaphysical or epistemic sense, and Dr. Krauss readily admitted that". The state we are discussing is still a manifestation of some entity, be it energy, matter, or otherwise. Therefore, the Universe - assuming it did come from this - did not, in fact, come from nothing according to this theory; thus ex nihilo claims are not validated by the theory which leads me to my first pointed question: Why did you say the universe came from "literally nothing" and then try to use it as justification for not needing a God-bound cosmological argument? (I don't dispute there are cosmological origin theories that don't require God, but this theory far from disproves other theories - in fact it validates a few)

I have a bone to pick with this topic and frankly, I hope you see why this is somewhat irritating to those people who work with these sorts of arguments on a daily basis.

My second question is: There are a lot of scientists who feel philosophers - as a rule - should keep out of their respective fields due to [apparent] ineptitude. Should it not also be the case that scientists reciprocate this decree given their [apparent] ineptitude in the field of philosophy?

Thank you so much for your time. I find it astounding that one of today's greatest science "popularizers" and, if I may say so, a personal hero of mine would make an appearance on Reddit.

Or he really did but felt bad for Jay, so he let him put his name in the credits.