0
0

[–] morkathell ago 

Please just be cool science facts and not conspiracy bullshit.

0
1

[–] MaFishTacosDaBombBro 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Going into this, I thought it was an advertisement for Scientology, but I was pleasantly surprised though.

0
1

[–] Whitworth 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

The mitochondria is the powerhouse of the neutron star.

0
1

[–] geosprintforever 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Carl Sagan said it better.

0
0

[–] lord_nougat ago 

Billions and billions of stars!

0
1

[–] ArsCortica 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I always knew God was lazy and copypasta'd stuff wherever he could get away with it.

0
0

[–] lord_nougat ago 

What a hack!

0
1

[–] 1nv1ctus [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I call that efficiency :D

[–] [deleted] 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Rocks are often circular, so they must work like eyeballs, right?

[–] [deleted] ago 

[Deleted]

0
3

[–] 1nv1ctus [S] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Form leads to function on all levels.

I think it's the opposite. Function leads to form on all levels – it's the reason why those levels of organization exist in the first place. Form is an emergent byproduct of the function(s) of the system, whereas the function(s) of that system are the emergent byproducts of the synergistic interactions between its components. The formal resemblance of the properties/products of disparate complex systems seems to be a product of similarly structured hierarchies, but it's not what's driving them.

0
3

[–] RevanProdigalKnight 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

So... we really are made of stardust? /s

[–] [deleted] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] Browngaijin 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

And puppies.

0
4

[–] 6705721? 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

The use of the word "human" implies that the endoplasmic reticulum structure is unique to Humans, but it's NOT. Even plants have it. http://www.els.net/WileyCDA/ElsArticle/refId-a0001673.html

0
1

[–] 1nv1ctus [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

What do you think a better headline would have been? Just take out the word 'human' altogether? Or substitute 'human cells' with 'eukaryotic cells'?

0
3

[–] 6705776? 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Replace "human cells" with "the endoplasmic reticulum of living cells"

This is an issue in popular science reporting - using words like "observe" that lay persons think means a human being observing, but it means no such thing, and the rest is history - the confusion between the collapse of a wave function and "observation" will probably continue forever in the pop-science mind.