#1

do you think this is a correct argument?
#2
the graph on the left is trending up and the graph on the right is trending down, really makes you think
#3
Is it from flipping the universe along the y axis? Don’t know why that would make it worth more, but seems like a lot of work to finish in just 300 years
#4
are these dollar figures adjusted for inflation? if not the 1700 figure would be valued at around 10 trillion $, not nearly as big a jump as it seems. and are these universes adjusted for cosmic inflation? #5 extrapolating on this trend, we find that the universe may have been completely worthless as recently as 400 years ago #6 the funny thing is that the "universe" only exists insofar as the earth is the divine center of everything and everything outside of it is actually non-existent lies from NATO or similar organizations #7 "$aggregate low then vs \$aggregate high now" is basically something every value theory will have its own explanation for; it's hard to consider this an argument (it seems more of a conversation starter than ender) if it could just as easily have been posted by someone promoting a subjective utility theory or whatever

who is the intended audience for this?
#8
i dont think an image macro that just says that a number went up over time is an "argument"
#9
seems pretty self-evident to me