No.

I'm saying that you're largely asking the wrong questions. You were asking the right question when you asked "who am I".

RightSide, I know a lot about physics. Like, a lot. Too much. And everything I know about it leads me to the conclusion that the universe is purely deterministic. That time and causality are as linear as a fucking cassette tape, that all my decisions are already made by circumstance of preconditions.

But I don't live that way. I presume that I have free will even though the science tells me convincingly that I probably don't.

Why?

Because I want to have a house on the shore of the great lakes with a boat and a hot wife and go fishing and hunting and eat tasty animals for dinner. I want to believe that I will get there and that when I do it will be because I spent a lifetime getting there.

That's my meaning. It might be the case that I have absolutely no control over whether that happens, but I choose to believe that I have the power to make it happen.

I choose to believe "I am me" when I strongly suspect there is no "I" at all.

But who am I?

This is the only part of that wall of text that actually matters.

You're too focused on the extraneous.

Yeah, no. I'm gonna block you now as a pedophile apologist. Get out.

So no, you can't.

Every person who commits sexual child abuse, is a pedophile.

There are pedophiles who aren't child sex abusers, but the reverse is definitionally impossible.

......

Can you construct a hypothetical scenario where a person would sexually abuse a child without having the impulse to do so?

So... you don't actually know.

Most sexual abuse of children is by non-pedophiles

Uh, no, that's not how words work.

To fight who?

Mmm so you didn't take the Taiwan bait. Was starting to think you were a party shill.

So which flavor of paranoid yokel are you? Appalachian, Bayou, or Montana?

I've seen the lunar rangefinding reflector experiment done and I've seen the landing sites in LRO data.

You believe whatever made up bullshit you want to believe.

Also, Taiwan is a free country.

Well of course you didn't go there, you're some stupid git on the internet. Probably have a degree in gender studies or some bullshit.

See, that wasn't so hard.

Yep. 1/6th gravity and no air resistance. Luckiest sons of bitches whoever lived and you're just jealous.

Okay, troll, you overshot your mark. There's no way you're this dumb, you're just being deliberately stupid.

There are a couple common problems in space photography that give people a sense of wrongness.

First... in space, rotating objects can easily exhibit precession, as this probe is. To our eyes it looks weird but that's just because we didn't evolve in a frictionless, freefall environment.

The second is the absence of stars in field. This is very simple. Objects in space, illuminated by the sun, are so fucking bright that you have really crank down on the aperture and the exposure time. This is something any photographer can understand if they've worked with real film.

Aside from heat shielding, space craft tend to be very bright white or reflective metal to reflect as much light as possible for thermal management.

.......

Okay I want you to this for me OP:

Stick your right hand out in front of you in a fist. Put it next to the right side of your screen.

Your fist is the sun. It's actually waaaaaay far off to the right of your screen, but whatever, the analogy works.

Now, you, your eyes, are earth. You're looking at the moon. The ISS is between you and the moon.

At no point, in the ISS's path in this picture, is it NOT facing the sun. Okay?

The ISS is way closer to your eyes, than the moon is. So there's nothing between your fist (the sun) and the ISS, so it will always stay illuminated.

Make sense?

Yes, what's your point?

That would be I think SBS 3 launching from Columbia on STS-5.

First commercial mission for the shuttle. Was supposed to be the first shuttle EVA but that didn't work out.

I think they just like saying twelve.

It's a good number; rather unfortunate we have five fingers cuz base 12 math would actually make a lot more sense.

Mmmm, no.

I'm distantly related to one of them.

They're dead, Jim.

Like, you like to save pictures from 20 years ago?

Digging through late 90's porn in 2021 be like...

Explain satellites you flat earth dumbtards

Oi git, it's spacetime that's flat. And this is not really up for dispute anymore, the flatness of the universe has been pretty conclusively demonstrated by ESA's Planck.

They brought in a dredger and removed 30k tons of sand.

Then there was a high tide, and they had a couple really big seagoing tugs. It's really about as simple as that. There's a really big difference between the dinky harbor tugs they started with and the seagoing tugs they eventually brought in. Harbor tugs need to turn fast but just need to bump a ship up against a pier. Sea tugs have the power to pull a dead ship in the open ocean.

Sometimes the answer really is "they're working on it, and it'll be done when its done". It might seem like they were working on it for days, but when you factor in the tides they only had maybe 10-15 hours where they were really able to apply force with any hope of it having an effect.

it was simply because it was a way to strike back at the North

Pretty much.

Booth was an angry reactionary who saw Lincoln as a tyrant. There really wasn't a lot more to it. Maybe his own inadequacies for having not fought for the south, and his egoism as an actor, but basically it was just one guy deciding to take matters into his own hands.

Amish are by religion, anti vaxx.

The Amish don't actually have a stated religious objection to vaccines (even the Old Order), although it's true that they are very under vaccinated. Medicine per-se isn't anti-community in the way that mass media and transportation are. They just don't actively seek out proactive treatment for anything. On the occasion that an amish person visits a clinic for an animal bite or a serious infection they'll typically accept shots for stuff like rabies or tetanus.