@[email protected]M to Science [email protected] • 1 year ago🤌🤌🤌mander.xyzimagemessage-square9fedilinkarrow-up1346arrow-down13
arrow-up1343arrow-down1image🤌🤌🤌mander.xyz@[email protected]M to Science [email protected] • 1 year agomessage-square9fedilink
minus-square@ChocoboRocketlink7•edit-21 year agoPlants do the star scale in reverse, with one star being the best All other star ratings are effectively bad, since they aren’t known to support life, let alone plants. It’s a pretty strange system, but hey I can’t photosynthesize anything so what do I know about the nuances of their star systems
minus-square@[email protected]OPMlinkfedilink3•1 year agoGolf scoring because they’re fancy like that.
minus-squareBoz (he/him)linkfedilink2•1 year agoOh, I see. I suppose I should expect that kind of reverse valuation from organisms that inhale carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen.
Plants do the star scale in reverse, with one star being the best
All other star ratings are effectively bad, since they aren’t known to support life, let alone plants.
It’s a pretty strange system, but hey I can’t photosynthesize anything so what do I know about the nuances of their star systems
Golf scoring because they’re fancy like that.
Oh, I see. I suppose I should expect that kind of reverse valuation from organisms that inhale carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen.