So this is on Mercedes for miscalculating the weight and a DSQ is only fair.

However, this whole tyre weight and marble pickup thing seems so silly:

You pick up a different amount of marbles depending on track length (or no in-lap like in Spa), rain can wash them away, if you do a long stint your tyres have less rubber left on them. Tyres are standardized, identical between all teams for the whole season and Pirelli knows exactly how much they weigh brand new. After the race FIA could just weigh the car without wheels. I’m assuming right now teams are leaving a slight weight margin, so they would be able to run even closer to the limit if they didn’t have to worry about tyre weight.

E

This is my headcanon now 😭

And Jesus has the audacity to say

Woe to that one by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that one not to have been born.

Guess what, someone had to betray you for the story to go forward

The only story that pops up is a pipeline rupture in Satartia, Mississippi. No fatalities, 46 people hospitalized. Maybe OP is misremembering?

https://apnews.com/general-news-24e50c057a8102b18247f1fad7837605 https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/26/22642806/co2-pipeline-explosion-satartia-mississippi-carbon-capture

Edit: They probably mean this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Nyos_disaster

I thought it was obvious enough😭

Pérez was only 4 points behind Max today, cut him some slack.

wow faith in humanity restored

Mental boom caught live

Edit: Netflix must be salivating

Did Piastri fuck Zak’s wife or why do they hate him so much?

I’m sensing an Austian GP 2.0

mf really turned a 1+1 contract into a -6 month contract…

Isn’t it fascinating how you can talk honestly about religious texts when you’re not bound by dogma? Fundamentalists hate this one simple trick.

it can be helpful to consider the thought as bad as the action for the purpose of weeding that behaviour out of our lives. Not that the thought is as bad as the action, because clearly it isn’t.

Considering how many (ex)Christian folks struggle with guilt for having “impure thoughts”, that appears to be a flawed approach. You can’t control what kinds of thoughts spontaneously appear in your mind. Imo you should simply be aware that these thoughts are separate from your intentions and actions towards that person, and don’t guide those actions.

Keep in mind that the Bible treats adultery as property crime against the father or husband of that particular woman. If you try to apply Jesus’ teachings to infidelity specifically, you must wrestle with a bunch of historical and cultural baggage. Nothing wrong with treating a story as inspirational, but again, be aware that you’re making Jesus more cool and progressive than he probably deserves.

Yeah, Jesus is prone to hyperbole, agree on that.

Counter point: literally the next two verses

31 “It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’
32 But I say to you that anyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Not to mention that “adultery in his heart” is essentially thought-crime, which I personally find rather unchill and not based.

DLSS and XeSS (XMX) are AI and they’re noticably better than non-hardware accelerated alternatives.

Yeah from my observations that seems to be the preferred interpretation.

A lot of Catholic apologetics picture God as basically an utilitarian, who thinks big picture and allows bad things (sin, suffering) to happen for greater good. Then they turn around and say only the mob boss gets to break the rules, and you should get in line and also stop masturbating.

Depictions of YHWH are inconsistent from book to book in OT, and even within one book you sometimes get different pictures. You have to remember that these texts were composed over hundreds of years.

Actually, it can be there, but then you won’t know how fast it’s moving.

The pattern I notice in fundamentalism is that you start with the assumption that your beliefs are “religiously true”, then you interpret your scripture in a way that supports those beliefs. Whether the scripture is historically accurate seems to be incidental.