Commenter Teffec wrote:
Heavy is the Head that Wears the Crown
Jalen Brunson has once again defied the odds.
The undersized second-round point guard actually pulled it off: living up to the nickname “King of New York” by bringing an NBA title to the Big Apple for the first time in over half a century.
How did he do it?
How did HE do it?
How did a man with comparable stature and explosive athleticism to my next door neighbor possibly outcompete the biggest genetic freaks on the planet and walk away with the prestigious MVP of the Finals?
While New Yorkers will forever call him “King,” Chinese basketball fans, a tad less reverentially, gave him the appellation “Big Head”.
No, they are not implying that he’s conceited. Rather, they are pointing out the obvious – that Jalen Brunson literally has a huge fucking head: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DXHSeQQEnp7/
“Oubre isn’t the first person to make comments about the size of Brunson’s head. His New York teammate, Josh Hart, has made similar comments, once revealing that Brunson was unable to fit into multiple hats he purchased on account of his head size.”
“Who cares?” a well-adjusted human being may ask, but the answer is anyone who wants to know why Jalen Brunson is so good.
A wise man once said, “intelligence is the ability to adapt, to take whatever situation you’re in and turn it to your advantage.”
Adaptation is the name of Brunson’s game. See him in action, and you’ll notice how he creates offense for himself and his teammates: feints, counters, counters to counters. He just reads, manipulates, and executes – taking what the defense gives him and turns it to his advantage time and time again.
The stadiometer at the draft combine missed what the calipers would have screamed: “this man knows how to play.”
Do you all agree that Brunson is so good because his head is so big?
Or do you not respect Pumpkin Person at all.
I don’t know what Brunson’s IQ is but he is a metaphor for why brain size tripled in 4 million years of human evolution. Despite being relatively short and unathletic, he dominates men much taller and more athletic thanks to an intelligence linked to his brain size. Similarly, despite our species lacking speed, strength, fur, fangs and claws, our species dominates much bigger, faster, stronger and ferocious animals, thanks to an intelligence linked our brain size. Big brains evolved, because when your situation is disadvantaged, you must turn it around to your advantage and by you, I mean your brain. That’s the essence of who you are.
Pumpkin Person 
If people hate me for saying that genes are needed for protein synthesis and they need to deny basic facts of reality to call me names and racist. Then I question their motives. Many people have in the past promoted lies for political gains. I believe that was the motive and postmodernism was used against me (which is a way of saying words can be used anyway you want to any means you want). It was sick and despicable.
Some Science is hard to understand but it was appalling that basic true things were said not to be true. What kind of person does that? Make up lies on people who was just trying and explain things. You can fact check everything I say but that be like fact checking if 1 + 1 = 2 (it made people angry some reason) so people said mean things to me.
That is what they did in other countries long ago. They forced people to believe lies. The government forced people to think untrue things. The people were scared to say anything different.
Some people believe they must force lies into other people heads the same way. Only they lack the political power to do so. This makes it hard for the lies to exist in an open society. Science can test ideas against reality so people cannot be fooled, not always. Too many people have tested these ideas for them to be forced to believe the opposite. Its super naive for people to think you can force lies into people heads by redefining words. People fight back.
All I ever did was try and explain thing the best I could.
Those explanations went against certain lies, making people angry.
Picking on me did not work because I am immune to anti-science propaganda, words did not make me disbelieve in chemistry or physics or biology. I was very upset and appalled people felt the need to disingenuously quote famous scientist in ways that did not disprove them at all. Chery picking is bad but red herring quotes are worse sometimes. A scientific theory is not discredited just because the scientist states what their theory is. Changing what words mean does not discredit a theory either.
If people wish to distort language to discredit science stuff that is on them because no one will believe it. Scientists don’t believe that shit. They do real experiments, they see the data they can make procedures for replications, nothing about the process involves calling people names or redefining words so the experiment would be falsified. Language has nothing to do with concrete real world application. Either the experiments results validated the hypothesis or they did not and to the larger community. No one has to force people to believe anything.
People get mad at some results but they exist.
There exists ways of making valid conclusions.
Just show how it is possible to duplicate the results.
When people can do it themselves repeatedly then no propaganda can make them not understand. Words then convey truths not lies.
Result can show us what exists in reality.
Testable perditions let us know these results are real.