Just funny that you are saying that you can’t relate to someone because they can’t relate to someone. Empathy isn’t just about feeling other people’s pain, it’s about being able to understand things from another perspective.
Not being able to relate to them is literally relating to them.
The question wasn’t wether there are inheritable health issues, diabetes, some cancer, etc are demonstrated to have a heredity component. I’m not even arguing that heart disease ‘isn’t’ hereditary, I’m just saying that in the context the argument, you saying that several of your family members had it doesn’t prove that specific thing is inherited. Everyone does of something and the fact that you can find 3 to 5 people in your lineage that died of that does point to it being inherited.
Shouldn’t exist. That’s different.
Their belief system is based on an a being that can’t be sense that banished people to infinite torment for following instincts that he designed them with, then sent part of himself to be tortured and killed as a sacrifice to make up for a curse he put on them, but only if you it was necessary. A ridiculous age of the earth is hardly the craziest thing schools like this teach.
That’s like saying black lung runs in families because your family all worked in the mines.
Funny? Do you think religious schools don’t exist?
Wonder how many new ones it’s creating.
Scientist: ‘Look at this science thing that is definitely true because DNA!’ Narrator: ‘It wasn’t true’
Was this description meant to be ironic, or was that accidental?
Which is exactly why the tariffs are stupid at one more level. The only thing they’re good for in theory is to level the playing field for non-tariffed products, to make them competitive to make ‘here’, but no company in it’s right mind is going to invest in the infrastructure it’s meant to drive knowing they aren’t guaranteed in the slightest.
Would be interesting if everyone still stuck using it consistently advertised a discount for finding them on any site besides Twitter. Might not make the biggest difference by itself but it could start a trickle that turns into the flood.
Basically a surcharge for users that only know Twitter or otherwise wouldn’t be bothered by the noise. Maybe call it a tarrif that can be easily avoided :)
Another way to look at it is like having to use Windows because that’s what they use at your job. There’s a problem but because most people are oblivious or don’t care, the momentum is difficult to escape. You may find it easy to say ‘quit you job then’ to fully show your disapproval but not everyone has that luxury.
I do hope everyone that is stuck using it mentions in every commission or interaction that they are available on different sites as well though.
Anyone still using it or of convenience though should quit immediately.
That’s a big leap… Dumb blonde to beating women.
Little odd of course, but not the worst way to try to illustrate more than 1/4 but not 1/2… Which seems to be in the ballpark of the number he mentioned. If 40% of spousal murders are committed by women it fair to say it’s not “always men”, but it is more than half but less that 3/4.
Makes sense, but it still seems like all the recognizable ‘quotes’ mentioned are quotes the movie used, and not ones that are came from the movie itself, to the point where it would only be in very specific context where anyone saying them would be quoting Aliens.
The top two are obviously familiar, but certainly wouldn’t attribute the first one to that movie. I don’t think I’ve ever heard the next two phrases used or remember them from the movie, and never heard anyone use ‘mostly’ as a reference from that movie.
Maybe it’s an insider thing
Do you think that’s what he meant by POST? Could have meant data delivery through http? Do you think they should know that one too?
That is true but pretty irrelevant. Is a law enforced is a completely different question from is it a law, and it’s not an insignificant degree of difference.
That’s like someone asking if chocolate ice cream exists and you saying it’s possible no one likes it. Technically true but irrelevant to the question.
That’s hardly a ‘lib move’, more like an ingrained human reaction to justify practically every action ever.
Technically yes, especially since this was a technical question, he wasnt asking if he would get pulled over, he was asking if there was a law being broken. You probably wouldn’t get arrested for hooking your donkey to a post on main Street on a Sunday in Colorado springs, but if you asked if there was a law against it, the answer would be in the codified law, not in is likelihood of a cop knowing it.
That just calculates into whether you get pulled over or get a ticket. He specifically asked if it was breaking a law which has little to do with where the cop is a dick or not. Doesn’t technically even depend on the judge.
It only ‘matters’ to the extent that OP claimed it doesn’t run in families, and you seemed to be claiming it does ‘because’ you had 3 -5 relatives that died from it. All I’m saying it’s that anecdotal evidence doesn’t refute an assertion like that.
If you’d said ‘it does run in families and here is a statistically significant sampling across variable x, y and z’ i wouldn’t be arguing, I’d likely be reading an article about it. But it’s worth pointing out when people use unscientific reasoning in a forum where other people might be influenced by an argument if no one calls out the fault in logic.