▲ 1388 ▼ OnLy tWo eLemEnTs (gregtech.eu) submitted 11 months ago by lena@gregtech.eu to c/science_memes@mander.xyz 221 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -17 points 11 months ago (15 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 15 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (14 children) What's in this for you? Why is it so important for you to believe that sex is binary, to try and convince everyone in this thread that sex is binary? How does this narrow-minded, oversimplified view that ignores modern biology serve you? And, maybe most curiously, why do you think "there's a few extremists pushing for silly things?" What silly things? What kinds of extremists? Let's go down this fucking rabbit hole together my dude. It's just so funny seeing you acknowledge all over the place that all these other characteristics of sex are not binary, except for gametes (which in reality, also aren't binary), and that just happens to be the thing you're pinning your definition of sex to. Like, the pieces are all there and it just looks like you're refusing to put them all together. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 14 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -10 points 11 months ago (13 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (12 children) sorry but you are disagreeing with the scientific and academic consensus. Hmmm, an interesting assertion, one that would be all the more interesting were it not for the open letter sent to the president, signed by ~3500 scientists, saying sex isn't binary. Weird. You wanna know what else is weird? This whole "gametes determine sex" thing is something Donald Trump says, and used as the "scientific basis" for one of his incredibly transphobic executive orders. An order that basically makes it illegal to be trans. The order that that letter I linked, the one signed by 3500 scientists, was a direct response to. You're refusing to acknowledge the scientific consensus, and that's really disappointing. No, what's disappointing is that you've spent the better part of your day parroting and defending right-wing pseudoscience, then have the gall to tell others that they're refusing to acknowledge scientific consensus. The idea you're so vehemently "just being the messenger" for originated over a hundred years ago dude. The science has changed since then. We've learned more. It's time for you to catch up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (11 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago (10 children) and then points out that it's scientifically inaccurate by quoting noted transphobe, Richard Dawkins lmao. Why are you so focused on spreading transphobic rhetoric? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -7 points 11 months ago (9 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (8 children) I think Richard Dawkins is a transphobe because he frequently makes public anti-trans statements and conflates gender and sex in a way that is weaponized against trans people. If you think acknowledging scientific truth is transphobic, that's entirely on you. Jesus dude this is just boring now. Claiming your outdated view is "scientific truth" hasn't worked all day, maybe find a new slant. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (6 children) It doesn't matter what arguments I give you, you're dug in. That's what's boring - every new angle anyone tries with you just gets the same old tired "my science is correct and infallible, yours is wrong" response. "Arguments" like that are boring. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -6 points 11 months ago (5 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (14 children) What's in this for you? Why is it so important for you to believe that sex is binary, to try and convince everyone in this thread that sex is binary? How does this narrow-minded, oversimplified view that ignores modern biology serve you? And, maybe most curiously, why do you think "there's a few extremists pushing for silly things?" What silly things? What kinds of extremists? Let's go down this fucking rabbit hole together my dude. It's just so funny seeing you acknowledge all over the place that all these other characteristics of sex are not binary, except for gametes (which in reality, also aren't binary), and that just happens to be the thing you're pinning your definition of sex to. Like, the pieces are all there and it just looks like you're refusing to put them all together. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 14 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -10 points 11 months ago (13 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (12 children) sorry but you are disagreeing with the scientific and academic consensus. Hmmm, an interesting assertion, one that would be all the more interesting were it not for the open letter sent to the president, signed by ~3500 scientists, saying sex isn't binary. Weird. You wanna know what else is weird? This whole "gametes determine sex" thing is something Donald Trump says, and used as the "scientific basis" for one of his incredibly transphobic executive orders. An order that basically makes it illegal to be trans. The order that that letter I linked, the one signed by 3500 scientists, was a direct response to. You're refusing to acknowledge the scientific consensus, and that's really disappointing. No, what's disappointing is that you've spent the better part of your day parroting and defending right-wing pseudoscience, then have the gall to tell others that they're refusing to acknowledge scientific consensus. The idea you're so vehemently "just being the messenger" for originated over a hundred years ago dude. The science has changed since then. We've learned more. It's time for you to catch up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (11 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago (10 children) and then points out that it's scientifically inaccurate by quoting noted transphobe, Richard Dawkins lmao. Why are you so focused on spreading transphobic rhetoric? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -7 points 11 months ago (9 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (8 children) I think Richard Dawkins is a transphobe because he frequently makes public anti-trans statements and conflates gender and sex in a way that is weaponized against trans people. If you think acknowledging scientific truth is transphobic, that's entirely on you. Jesus dude this is just boring now. Claiming your outdated view is "scientific truth" hasn't worked all day, maybe find a new slant. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (6 children) It doesn't matter what arguments I give you, you're dug in. That's what's boring - every new angle anyone tries with you just gets the same old tired "my science is correct and infallible, yours is wrong" response. "Arguments" like that are boring. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -6 points 11 months ago (5 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -10 points 11 months ago (13 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (12 children) sorry but you are disagreeing with the scientific and academic consensus. Hmmm, an interesting assertion, one that would be all the more interesting were it not for the open letter sent to the president, signed by ~3500 scientists, saying sex isn't binary. Weird. You wanna know what else is weird? This whole "gametes determine sex" thing is something Donald Trump says, and used as the "scientific basis" for one of his incredibly transphobic executive orders. An order that basically makes it illegal to be trans. The order that that letter I linked, the one signed by 3500 scientists, was a direct response to. You're refusing to acknowledge the scientific consensus, and that's really disappointing. No, what's disappointing is that you've spent the better part of your day parroting and defending right-wing pseudoscience, then have the gall to tell others that they're refusing to acknowledge scientific consensus. The idea you're so vehemently "just being the messenger" for originated over a hundred years ago dude. The science has changed since then. We've learned more. It's time for you to catch up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (11 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago (10 children) and then points out that it's scientifically inaccurate by quoting noted transphobe, Richard Dawkins lmao. Why are you so focused on spreading transphobic rhetoric? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -7 points 11 months ago (9 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (8 children) I think Richard Dawkins is a transphobe because he frequently makes public anti-trans statements and conflates gender and sex in a way that is weaponized against trans people. If you think acknowledging scientific truth is transphobic, that's entirely on you. Jesus dude this is just boring now. Claiming your outdated view is "scientific truth" hasn't worked all day, maybe find a new slant. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (6 children) It doesn't matter what arguments I give you, you're dug in. That's what's boring - every new angle anyone tries with you just gets the same old tired "my science is correct and infallible, yours is wrong" response. "Arguments" like that are boring. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -6 points 11 months ago (5 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (12 children) sorry but you are disagreeing with the scientific and academic consensus. Hmmm, an interesting assertion, one that would be all the more interesting were it not for the open letter sent to the president, signed by ~3500 scientists, saying sex isn't binary. Weird. You wanna know what else is weird? This whole "gametes determine sex" thing is something Donald Trump says, and used as the "scientific basis" for one of his incredibly transphobic executive orders. An order that basically makes it illegal to be trans. The order that that letter I linked, the one signed by 3500 scientists, was a direct response to. You're refusing to acknowledge the scientific consensus, and that's really disappointing. No, what's disappointing is that you've spent the better part of your day parroting and defending right-wing pseudoscience, then have the gall to tell others that they're refusing to acknowledge scientific consensus. The idea you're so vehemently "just being the messenger" for originated over a hundred years ago dude. The science has changed since then. We've learned more. It's time for you to catch up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (11 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago (10 children) and then points out that it's scientifically inaccurate by quoting noted transphobe, Richard Dawkins lmao. Why are you so focused on spreading transphobic rhetoric? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -7 points 11 months ago (9 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (8 children) I think Richard Dawkins is a transphobe because he frequently makes public anti-trans statements and conflates gender and sex in a way that is weaponized against trans people. If you think acknowledging scientific truth is transphobic, that's entirely on you. Jesus dude this is just boring now. Claiming your outdated view is "scientific truth" hasn't worked all day, maybe find a new slant. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (6 children) It doesn't matter what arguments I give you, you're dug in. That's what's boring - every new angle anyone tries with you just gets the same old tired "my science is correct and infallible, yours is wrong" response. "Arguments" like that are boring. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -6 points 11 months ago (5 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (11 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago (10 children) and then points out that it's scientifically inaccurate by quoting noted transphobe, Richard Dawkins lmao. Why are you so focused on spreading transphobic rhetoric? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -7 points 11 months ago (9 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (8 children) I think Richard Dawkins is a transphobe because he frequently makes public anti-trans statements and conflates gender and sex in a way that is weaponized against trans people. If you think acknowledging scientific truth is transphobic, that's entirely on you. Jesus dude this is just boring now. Claiming your outdated view is "scientific truth" hasn't worked all day, maybe find a new slant. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (6 children) It doesn't matter what arguments I give you, you're dug in. That's what's boring - every new angle anyone tries with you just gets the same old tired "my science is correct and infallible, yours is wrong" response. "Arguments" like that are boring. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -6 points 11 months ago (5 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago (10 children) and then points out that it's scientifically inaccurate by quoting noted transphobe, Richard Dawkins lmao. Why are you so focused on spreading transphobic rhetoric? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -7 points 11 months ago (9 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (8 children) I think Richard Dawkins is a transphobe because he frequently makes public anti-trans statements and conflates gender and sex in a way that is weaponized against trans people. If you think acknowledging scientific truth is transphobic, that's entirely on you. Jesus dude this is just boring now. Claiming your outdated view is "scientific truth" hasn't worked all day, maybe find a new slant. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (6 children) It doesn't matter what arguments I give you, you're dug in. That's what's boring - every new angle anyone tries with you just gets the same old tired "my science is correct and infallible, yours is wrong" response. "Arguments" like that are boring. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -6 points 11 months ago (5 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -7 points 11 months ago (9 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (8 children) I think Richard Dawkins is a transphobe because he frequently makes public anti-trans statements and conflates gender and sex in a way that is weaponized against trans people. If you think acknowledging scientific truth is transphobic, that's entirely on you. Jesus dude this is just boring now. Claiming your outdated view is "scientific truth" hasn't worked all day, maybe find a new slant. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (6 children) It doesn't matter what arguments I give you, you're dug in. That's what's boring - every new angle anyone tries with you just gets the same old tired "my science is correct and infallible, yours is wrong" response. "Arguments" like that are boring. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -6 points 11 months ago (5 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (8 children) I think Richard Dawkins is a transphobe because he frequently makes public anti-trans statements and conflates gender and sex in a way that is weaponized against trans people. If you think acknowledging scientific truth is transphobic, that's entirely on you. Jesus dude this is just boring now. Claiming your outdated view is "scientific truth" hasn't worked all day, maybe find a new slant. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (6 children) It doesn't matter what arguments I give you, you're dug in. That's what's boring - every new angle anyone tries with you just gets the same old tired "my science is correct and infallible, yours is wrong" response. "Arguments" like that are boring. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -6 points 11 months ago (5 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -8 points 11 months ago (7 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (6 children) It doesn't matter what arguments I give you, you're dug in. That's what's boring - every new angle anyone tries with you just gets the same old tired "my science is correct and infallible, yours is wrong" response. "Arguments" like that are boring. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -6 points 11 months ago (5 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago (6 children) It doesn't matter what arguments I give you, you're dug in. That's what's boring - every new angle anyone tries with you just gets the same old tired "my science is correct and infallible, yours is wrong" response. "Arguments" like that are boring. 🤷 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -6 points 11 months ago (5 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -6 points 11 months ago (5 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) Are you serious? Like, you can't be serious at this point. I sent that article to you, like 4 comments ago. We've already discussed it, in this very thread. 🥱 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children) No, I still don't agree with the same incorrect bullshit you've been saying for the past 36 hours now permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -4 points 11 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago This is just indicative of how dug in you are. You won't even consider the possibility of being wrong as long as there are "experts" agreeing with your misguided view. permalink fedilink source parent
