fixed the window perspective a bit
just making some edits along reading for the folder
>>113019572Okay, I think I kinda get it.
But like I said earlier in the thread I'm not following much of anything comics, DC, Marvel what have you, those are just names to me.
So I don't know what shared universe of the Reed thing is really but hm alright.
>I can't let it slide that a book that had a stated goal of teaching kids to love science got basic science wrong on the first page while trying to act like it was smart.That's a more valid complaint, but I don't feel like it has set out to do that?
Unless that's how it was marketed.
I just picked it up randomly and this seems like a silly kid genius thing for kids you find anywhere.
Unless you're making the point that since it is saying things like that and it's aimed at kids it's automatically something wrong since it shouldn't be telling it to them but then like most entertainment from comics and cartoons have spouted dumb shit to kids, that's nothing new, again unless it specifically has a cause to be educational somewhere.
>That's just enough of a dropped ball that we should keep shaming for it years later. It's the only way people will learn.I get that, but eh, things can be enjoyed on their other merits, you can bring the bad to the light without ignoring the good.
