u/DropsyJolt

Yeah, that is true. I was more thinking about guys who have no serious background in the sport. Person like that is also more likely to be delusional about his abilities.

Wonder how many men overestimate the difference between men and women, to the degree that they think they can be competitive against professional women. There is a real difference of course but it's not even close to the difference that being a pro athlete compared to a regular Joe is. Men's world records are on average about 10% better but a professional athlete is going to be many times better than you.

That can't happen until 2029 at the earliest since you need the Presidency.

One of the leads includes camera footage from a crash retrieval operation that reportedly showed bodies resembling Nordic-looking aliens, which Grusch has previously spoken out about.

Oh for f's sake... This is funny in a tragic sense since tax payer money is going into this nonsense. That said, I am a little bit jealous of people who are gullible enough to believe that tall and gorgeous humanoid aliens are visiting us. It sounds a lot more interesting than reality.

There might be something wrong with you if you voluntarily subject yourself to 1,300 words of Trump's asinine ranting without getting paid to suffer through it.

Which Dem said that?

What makes this realization about education so disappointing is that it wouldn't even be that hard to fix. For example, to detect health related bs. you don't need to memorize all the ten thousand facts that you do in medical school. You just need to understand the basic methodology of medicine, and it's not all that complicated.

Medicine isn't based on cherry picked individual studies but meta-analyses of all the relevant studies and very large cohort studies. So if someone bases their health claim on something like "a Harvard study found that...", then you should be suspicious. Another is that animal studies guide research but are nowhere near enough. The studies have to be done with humans. Similarly mechanistic explanations are interesting but not conclusive, as often there is a fantastic biochemical theory but then it does nothing when studied with actual humans.

Also consensus is king. To say that you trust some minority expert opinion over the consensus necessarily implies that you know better than the majority. Because how else would you know what to trust?

Yes, and? Where is the connection there that makes hating them wrong?

Who is the cult leader?

Why do you think that being dependent on corporations makes it wrong to not support billionaires who choose to spend, and are allowed to spend, ridiculous sums of money to elect and influence politicians who make decisions for everyone?

You don't even need a separate tool for this. Just type to Google: 2.2 lbs to kg. It will give you the answer and the conversion tool.

Well it's a meaningless question since I would never consider something like that when deciding who to vote for. The files matter of course but not in the macro scale that Presidents are meant to operate in.

Trump made it clear in his campaigning that he would increase inflation, or CPI more accurately, and history showed that he will also increase the federal deficit while doing it. Things like that which actually affect the lives of basically everyone.

Right, looking back at what it did before and then projecting what will happen when it no longer does anything. Is there some problem with the methodology?

You voted based on the Epstein files? Not tariffs or corruption but the Epstein files?

The formatting is a little strange. It's not like they needed to do that since it is ludicrous to claim that Biden demanded the same level of loyalty from the DOJ. It would be a hilariously stupid way to use his power to command a prosecution of his own son, only to then pardon him later, when he could have simply ended the investigation.

And the Republicans have prevented any federal investigations from even starting. By the time Democrats get their opportunity to begin Trump will be almost at the end of his term and then that will be the new excuse for calling everything moot.

The problem I see with setting the level of evidence as the standard is that it admits reasonable doubt in the cases where that standard is not met.

I don't know then. Maybe an extension. Here is the title of the study if you want to Google it:

Evaluating the impact of two decades of USAID interventions and projecting the effects of defunding on mortality up to 2030: a retrospective impact evaluation and forecasting analysis

It works for me and I even tried with another browser to make sure. Are you on mobile?

https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(25)01186-9/fulltext01186-9/fulltext)

If anything it is a severe underestimate.

You mean that 243 million would have died but for the gutting of USAID?

And only some 700,000 people had to pay for that with their lives. Such a W.

Politics is everywhere now. It is what drives traffic. But yes, Reddit is very left leaning but I don't think that requires bots. Humans are capable of going where others already agree with them, because that is comfortable. Universities are also very much left leaning and I don't think they are full of robots just yet.

See what happens if you tell r conservative what you truly think about Trump.

You do realize that 99% of top daily posts being left wing is different from 99% of the user base being left wing? It will be a majority for sure but you don't need a 99 to 1 advantage to dominate the upvotes.