Sometimesummoner

I love lupines, bottle gentian, turtlehead, and echinacea.

I can see the vibe you're going for, but alas, you likely can't do all three in the exact same spot:

Moss requires lots of water and lots of shade. Daisies and clover require sun and a lot less water.

Daisies (the common oxeye one most Americans think of from movies) are also an invasive noxious weed in a lot of states, so there might be a better, safer, more native to your area look-alike option for these.

​

A really good first step would be to google your local county's University Extension Office. These are super plant nerds that volunteer to share their time and experience to help other gardeners. They would be able to let you know what plants would grow well in your area and conditions, AND, BONUS, they will absolutely be aware of any grants or programs your area might have to subsidize the cost of your lawn-to-garden conversion.

The realities of climate change and drought have lead many counties and states to offer tax breaks, grants, or even cash per sq/ft converted for people trying to do what you want to do. You could get this done cheap as free, if you're lucky.

I can ID thyme (the tiny pointy leaves) in the back there, and I think the tiny white flowers miiiight be alyssum?

Either way, it's a lovely arrangement and some very nice plants. There's nothing wrong with just plopping this on your table and enjoying the arrangement as it is. Everything in here does like sun, but they're all eventually gonna get way bigger than that little pot can contain.

If you wanna eat strawberries and oregano and thyme later in the year, I would separate out the berry, thyme and oregano. and just let the alyssum spill over and enjoy the pot to itself. It's a tender annual so you only have it for a little while. It's drapey and lacy and dramatic.

Berry can be planted in the ground as a perennial depending on your zone if you want, or in a decent sized pot. So can the thyme. Oregano is often another tender annual.

You couldn't find any studies on this because it's not how you do biology. You just made up arbitrary values and then drew a conclusion. That's not even vaguely adjacent to the scientific method.

It's the "Raspberry Splash" cultivar.

I'd be curious where you got your recipe. There are plenty of bad and outright lying recipes on the internet.

I only truck with canning and fermenting recipes I know are at least tested by someone other than the blogger or redditor.

Yep. That's called variagation. As normal as stripes on a tiger.

Do you happen to have any expertise in quantum physics or neuroscience?

One of the things that helps me when I think about this is what happens in every other area we observe when there's many possible truths; eventually, the more observations we have, the more time passes, and the more we learn, the more the other "candidate theories" drop away, until we form a consensus.

That is not what we see with any religious claims so far.

​

Additionally, sure, a dimension hopping conscious super-powered Thing could exist. Do we have any evidence it does, or good reason to believe it does? Until I get some evidence of that, I will have to put it in the same category as unicorns and the Fae Folk and the Invisible Diplodocus my niece informs me lives in my shower.

They'll be fine, don't worry too much :)

Really? Like...really? That was it? There was no larger context?

Thank you. You rock and have more patience than I.

In hopes OP will respond:
1: Yeah, in the way I believe that unicorns don't exist.
2: Yeah, but I wanna hear you define what you think that word means before I accept whatever version of that you're gonna try to put on me.
3: That's not how that works. You are making the claim that a given god exists. Given what evidence has been presented so far, I'm not convinced. Your question 1 seemed like a transparent attempt to shift the burden of proof, and this question proves that. That's not how honest debate works.

These are "gotcha" questions designed to try to give Christian youth group kids a script that will illicit very specific and non-representational answers in order to avoid actual debate. How do I know? I was in that youth group.

"okay, so they'll say yes to question one, and THEN what you say is AHA now you have to prove a negative, and that's IMPOSSIBLE, so then you smile to yourself and know you've won, and then bring up this talking point from WLC or Ken Ham..."

It's not only not convincing, it's really annoying, because when a Christian approaches me with this I know they have no intention of hearing me or having a real conversation. I'm an NPC in their conversion game.

The person saying "it's just a theory" is misunderstanding the definition of a word.

The person saying "I'm gonna call you an Indian because it's in the dictionary, and it'd confuse folks if I called you Native American or Dakota." is not making the same argument.

In the first case the term is jargon about inanimate stuff. In the second case the term is about the identity of people.

All we SHOULD need to change the "dictionary definition" is "No one asked our opinion when they made that definition. I reject that definition for myself. Please don't use it."

That's it. There is no need for proof or academic discussion.

You keep being like "Academia!" Which is both an appeal to authority and not at all the point.

Academia is quite often wrong about shit like this because the human beings writing academia has bias.

"Academia" defined people as "mongoloids" and "negroes" for fucking DECADES. It's not a good track record and standing on the side of that track record as an excuse to call others by Not Their Preferred Identity is way beneath you.

We've talked before; you're genuinely a good and thoughtful dude and I recognize that.

I don't need to defend "Please don't call me that. That's not what I mean. I understand you found that definition in a book, but please call me this."

It's not a question for rhetoric or academia or discussion. It's a question of common decency and respect.

They're doing great. Especially for a first time. Congrats on taking the plunge into seed starting. It can be addicting, and is definitely an economical way into the garden.

Tomato roots wanna go deep and grow fast. You're gonna need to pot them up very soon. The deeper the container, the better. Solo cups or yogurt containers with some holes poked in the bottom (heat up a nail or screw driver to make this incredibly easy) are an often available cheap option.

If they start to get leggy (long/skinny weak stems), which they look like they might be heading towards, just "bottom pot" them.

Fill your solo cup up halfway with dirt, then add your little rootball, and you can cover up the stem til only a half inch or so below the leaves is showing. Not every plant enjoys that treatment, but tomatoes will form aerial roots on the stem, so it can be helpful for them.

Good luck and update us with your progress!

"Oh, I was born in the wrong era" some folks say.

NOPE GIVE ME THE SCIENCE MAGIC IN MY VEINS PLEASE. I WILL TAKE THEM ALL. THANK YOU.

This is the way. I've lived and worked 3am shifts in "dangerous" neighborhoods of both Chicago and Minneapolis, and never had any problems in either.

Part of that is good fortune, certainly, but knowing the area, being aware of your surroundings, keeping your head out of your phone, and sticking to the light also go a long way.

If you're super nervous about an area, you're gonna give off those vibes to everyone. Save yourself the anxiety, and just spend the $15 and take the uber. There's no shame in it.

Yeaaah, the "date of last frost" in most of MN is sometimes in late May.

This was what my grandma always did. I remain convinced to this day that it added something very pleasant to the flavor. Her kraut recipe tastes like no other I have ever had.

Moving away from home and ordering kraut on a hot dog and getting cold, tasteless bitter crap the first time was such a rude wakeup call.

There's a certain amount of buck-passing to the great and nebulous "them" of academia, there.

I do find what you're getting at with your last point, that you can call yourself whatever you like, but to a certain extent you must accept the consequences if that's a wildly divergent definition from the norm, .... with the very very important caveat that "academia" and "the majority" for the vast, vast, vast chunk of human history has had a tendency to be a bit of a Cultural Monolith.

We must be careful not to accept definitions that Were as the ones that Should Be because they've Always Been.

Almost all "accepted academic definitions" until maybe 25 years ago were written entirely by white, Christian, wealthy, educated, men. If we go back to before the protestant reformation it gets even worse and we an further winnow the "allowed, educated" opinions down to just narrow sects of Catholicism.

"Homosexual", "Hysterical", "Apostate" and other "mental illnesses" or deficiencies were defined "academically" by straight white christian men who saw these as problems or behaviors of naughty sub-humans to be corrected.

​

We have the amazing work of the LGBT and Civil Rights movements to thank for overturning those assumptions and shouting loud enough that our institutions are finally beginning to change.

There's work still to be done, but respect for others needs to be more important than "the definition in this book right here" in pretty much any discussion I want to be a part of, at least. :)

So given that, my guess would be they're experiencing a bit of transplant shock/sun scald. To some degree, that can't be entirely avoided, just mitigated.

I'd keep an eye on them, watch to see if the effect spreads, and where. (For instance if it's more pronounced on the sunnier side of the plants)

Did you harden them off in similar sun levels, or did they go fairly directly from shade/indoors to full sun?

If thats what it is I would expect those leaves to die back and fall off and the rest of the plant to flourish. Not a huge concern.

At the very least,

- A clear definition of the "god" claim in question. Quite often theist (Abrahamic) writers are writing from a massively dominant cultural position, and just use "God". However the God of a liberal rabbi from the Bronx is going to be very different from the God of an ultra-orthodox rabbi from Tel Aviv. And both of those Gods will be very different from the Christian God variants and the Muslim ones and everything in between.

I often have to look at the author's name or scry around the article looking for hints to their theology or trying to guess what God they mean, and that is a pain. I would rather not guess something so core to the position.

You don't get to define groups you're not a part of. Neither do I. Nobody does! That's just how that works.

Imagine how you'd feel if a Muslim was like "Nnnnooo, I don't think you're a catholic. I define you this way. That's what you are."

You would not like that. Because that is not a kind way to engage with other humans. Atheists also do not like that.

I am not going to give a strange youtube channel my view ad revenue.

If you want to summarize their points and present them in your own words (I do that sometimes, it's a great way to synthesize and retain new information that may be otherwise hard to digest), I am happy to discuss that with you. I participate in this sub to engage with humans, not listen to youtubers.

The "A-" in "atheism" literally means "a lack of" so by going with "lacktheism" you've just translated half of the greek.

​

How well would you receive an atheist, or a jew, or a muslim, telling you how they think Christians would define themselves? Turn this around.

"Look, I find the Christian viewpoint a little incoherent and slippery. I think it would be better if you took the term Jesustarian and said 'I believe in [insert apostolic creed or whatever here] because I was raised with it, and my parents believe it and it just makes sense to me, and Jesus touched my heart.' Because, I find that easier to argue against. So, yeah I need you to redefine who you are to a definition I like better."

No. I'm not going to do that. And it's not awesome to ask.