Editing 1520: Degree-Off

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 23: Line 23:
 
In the title text the biologist goes on to declare in {{w|All caps}} that she is surprised a physicist isn't "harder", after all their condescending towards the "squishy" sciences. The use of 'hard' and 'squishy' is a play on the colloquial division between the so-called 'hard' sciences (such as physics and chemistry) and 'soft' sciences (such as biology and geology). 'Hard' sciences usually refer to the perception that in fields like physics, precisely repeatable experiments and measurements are possible, as opposed to 'soft' sciences seen as placing less emphasis on precisely quantifiable predictability - however Hairbun is extending 'hard' to its meaning of 'stoic', mocking Cueball for not being able to weather a personal moral attack. Again, she is indicating that she's upset by directly referencing a mocking portrayal of other fields allegedly made by Cueball.
 
In the title text the biologist goes on to declare in {{w|All caps}} that she is surprised a physicist isn't "harder", after all their condescending towards the "squishy" sciences. The use of 'hard' and 'squishy' is a play on the colloquial division between the so-called 'hard' sciences (such as physics and chemistry) and 'soft' sciences (such as biology and geology). 'Hard' sciences usually refer to the perception that in fields like physics, precisely repeatable experiments and measurements are possible, as opposed to 'soft' sciences seen as placing less emphasis on precisely quantifiable predictability - however Hairbun is extending 'hard' to its meaning of 'stoic', mocking Cueball for not being able to weather a personal moral attack. Again, she is indicating that she's upset by directly referencing a mocking portrayal of other fields allegedly made by Cueball.
  
To be fair to Cueball, the outbreak of disease is more a topic for epidemiology, and biology has spawned multiple diseases, atrocities, and bad movies. However, the Manhattan Project marked the first time in history that humanity possessed the ability to destroy itself and shortly thereafter humanity got {{w|Cold War|perilously close to doing so}}.
+
To be fair to Cueball, the outbreak of disease is more a topic for epidemiology, and biology has spawned multiple diseases, atrocities, and bad movies. However, the Manhattan Project marked the first time in history that humanity possessed the ability to destroy itself - and shortly thereafter humanity got {{w|Cold War|perilously close to doing so}}.
  
In [[520: Cuttlefish]] Randall shows that he personally respects biologists or at least fears them.
+
In [[520: Cuttlefish]] Randall shows that he personally respects biologists - or at least fears them.
  
 
Within a year Randall has made several other comics about nuclear weapons, this one was the first of these the second, [[1539: Planning]], came out just 1½ month after this one and after that these two were released early in 2016: [[1626: Judgment Day]] and [[1655: Doomsday Clock]]. Nuclear weapons are also mentioned twice in ''[[Thing Explainer]]'', specifically they are explained in the explanation for ''Machine for burning cities'' about {{w|Thermonuclear weapon|thermonuclear bombs}}, but they are also mentioned in ''Boat that goes under the sea'' about a submarine that carries nukes. All three comics and both explanations in the book, does like this comic, comment on how insane it is that we have created enough firepower to obliterate Earth several times (or at least scourge it for any human life).
 
Within a year Randall has made several other comics about nuclear weapons, this one was the first of these the second, [[1539: Planning]], came out just 1½ month after this one and after that these two were released early in 2016: [[1626: Judgment Day]] and [[1655: Doomsday Clock]]. Nuclear weapons are also mentioned twice in ''[[Thing Explainer]]'', specifically they are explained in the explanation for ''Machine for burning cities'' about {{w|Thermonuclear weapon|thermonuclear bombs}}, but they are also mentioned in ''Boat that goes under the sea'' about a submarine that carries nukes. All three comics and both explanations in the book, does like this comic, comment on how insane it is that we have created enough firepower to obliterate Earth several times (or at least scourge it for any human life).

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)