Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
10 hours ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

As long as you're chiming in on the thread - how do you feel about the idea that "nobody cares" about snow removal businesses?

Your opinion is quite welcome.

Nobody cares about snow removal businesses.   Bahahahahahahaha.  ASSume much?  It was more nobody cares about you.  My snow removal guy is very nice, smart and does a wonderful job.  I paid him more than I needed to this past winter because of that.  It’s easy to see that wouldn’t be the case with you.  

  • Haha 1
Posted

And everyone else's as well.   It does mine.   TPT talks about monsters.   This is the monster of all time.   A way to ruin children, make money, and leave devastation in your wake. 

mspart

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, mspart said:

And everyone else's as well.   It does mine.   TPT talks about monsters.   This is the monster of all time.   A way to ruin children, make money, and leave devastation in your wake. 

mspart

It will put his in a knot for a different reason than yours and mine 

Edited by JimmyBT
Posted
On 3/12/2024 at 8:46 PM, JimmyBT said:

Touché 

I will counter your BS(216 instances) with a fact checking of it, like I did before that you refuse to admit, that you probably won't read, I'll leave the reasoning to you. 

Here is the link if you want to click and cry:

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/fact-check-216-instances-of-factual

"On Monday evening, prominent right-wing activist Michael Shellenberger, known for pushing anti-scientific views, released what he dubbed "the WPATH files." In this highly editorialized document, select decontextualized images of forum posts from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health were made public. The document, replete with 37,569 words of editorial commentary before even presenting the so-called leaks, leans heavily into opinion and pseudoscience, urging readers to view it as a "groundbreaking scandal." However, a closer inspection of the actual messages, achievable only after wading through the equivalent of a novella's worth of editorial content, reveals rather mundane and often almost dull exchanges between doctors, psychologists, and therapists. These professionals are seen asking about edge cases and seeking advice from colleagues on patient circumstances. Despite attempts to cast the messages in a negative light, the report significantly misses the mark. In a thorough fact-check of the document, I have uncovered 216 instances of factual inaccuracies, erroneous citations, misinterpretations of what is “leaked,” and purposeful omissions contradicting the authors central editorialized claims. "

I know you won't change your mind because you believe this crap. you can't change your mind now. You're too sunk into the cost of believing false things. 

Posted
19 hours ago, mspart said:

And everyone else's as well.   It does mine.   TPT talks about monsters.   This is the monster of all time.   A way to ruin children, make money, and leave devastation in your wake. 

mspart

Do you ever search for the opposing arguments of your own ideas? Doesn't seem like it. These are easy to find and debunk. Your resources are crap. Your reasoning is crap. Your ideas are crap. I'm sorry. It must not feel good to be so bad at this. 

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Touché 

I will counter your BS(216 instances) with a fact checking of it, like I did before that you refuse to admit, that you probably won't read, I'll leave the reasoning to you. 

Here is the link if you want to click and cry:

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/fact-check-216-instances-of-factual

"On Monday evening, prominent right-wing activist Michael Shellenberger, known for pushing anti-scientific views, released what he dubbed "the WPATH files." In this highly editorialized document, select decontextualized images of forum posts from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health were made public. The document, replete with 37,569 words of editorial commentary before even presenting the so-called leaks, leans heavily into opinion and pseudoscience, urging readers to view it as a "groundbreaking scandal." However, a closer inspection of the actual messages, achievable only after wading through the equivalent of a novella's worth of editorial content, reveals rather mundane and often almost dull exchanges between doctors, psychologists, and therapists. These professionals are seen asking about edge cases and seeking advice from colleagues on patient circumstances. Despite attempts to cast the messages in a negative light, the report significantly misses the mark. In a thorough fact-check of the document, I have uncovered 216 instances of factual inaccuracies, erroneous citations, misinterpretations of what is “leaked,” and purposeful omissions contradicting the authors central editorialized claims. "

I know you won't change your mind because you believe this crap. you can't change your mind now. You're too sunk into the cost of believing false things. 

All I said was this would get your thong in a knot.  And of course it did. 

Edited by JimmyBT
Posted

I love how certain people think only their resources are right and everyone else’s are crap.  Even though they use more than questionable sources.  

  • Bob 1
Posted
13 hours ago, Offthemat said:

A usefull article until they start repeating speculation from people who weren't there.  Why not just leave the article to the new facts?

Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign ... "Nex died one day after being beaten unconscious in a school bathroom, and following more than a year of bullying and harassment at school," Robinson said. 

How would Robinson know this?  Why not quote the direct source from which Robinson recieved her information?  Robinson is a very biased source.   Everything we know from actual reports from sources that would know was that the ~3 girls poured/assaulted Nex with water and she slipped at some point and hit her head.  If she was actually "beaten unconscious" wouldn't this show up in the hospital report & autopsy and would Nex had bee able to walk directly after.

I'd blame this on the editor, they like to publish a new article and throw the old stuff toward the end.  Generally once if find something that is known to not be true I quit ready.

 

2BPE 11/17/24 SMC

Posted
14 minutes ago, ionel said:

A usefull article until they start repeating speculation from people who weren't there.  Why not just leave the article to the new facts?

Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign ... "Nex died one day after being beaten unconscious in a school bathroom, and following more than a year of bullying and harassment at school," Robinson said. 

How would Robinson know this?  Why not quote the direct source from which Robinson recieved her information?  Robinson is a very biased source.   Everything we know from actual reports from sources that would know was that the ~3 girls poured/assaulted Nex with water and she slipped at some point and hit her head.  If she was actually "beaten unconscious" wouldn't this show up in the hospital report & autopsy and would Nex had bee able to walk directly after.

I'd blame this on the editor, they like to publish a new article and throw the old stuff toward the end.  Generally once if find something that is known to not be true I quit ready.

 

I agree, but the story is that Nex was the one that initiated the assault - pouring or throwing water on the girls that were laughing at her.  The opinions should have been left out and covered in another article should they become newsworthy.  I don’t subscribe to the publication.  

Posted
1 hour ago, JimmyBT said:

I love how certain people think only their resources are right and everyone else’s are crap.  Even though they use more than questionable sources.  

Says the person that has recently used questionable sources and lashes out when questioned about them. 

Pity party, table for one. 

Posted
15 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Says the person that has recently used questionable sources and lashes out when questioned about them. 

Pity party, table for one. 

But it’s ok for you.  Got it. 

Posted
16 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Says the person that has recently used questionable sources and lashes out when questioned about them. 

Pity party, table for one. 

Lashes out.  Again pet your cat. 

Posted
43 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

That's sad. 

Yes it is.  The girl needed help and didn’t get it.  However, the official story, the truth, bears no resemblance to the insinuation of your OP.  And as long as people like you continue to act like you, the problem will never be resolved. 

  • Fire 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...