No, it's not the same. Perhaps you have no idea about scientific enquiry or standards, and so your world is just a insane nightmare of lies with no conception of truth, and thus no hope of finding it.

Sadly the truth of many/most things is not clear, but some information does exist that we can learn from.

Good luck in your waking nightmare.

It still means the same thing. It's just more fancy sounding words for "does my tribe approve?". A "reputable journal" is "something my tribe screens for wrongthink" and "peer-review" means "a lot of people from my tribe agree".

The only reason you have an easy way to trust these is because they are from your tribe. So even if they are wrong, at least you are all wrong together.

It's essentially a form of confirmation bias.

Nah, you need to go easy on the red pills. Some tribes are genuinely stupider than others.

I should have been more specific, but my default reputable source is s peer-reviewed publication in a reputable journal. That's pretty easy to find/trust over the internet.

Shit like this is ok if it's entertaining, but you're safer to assume it's a lie without a reputable source.

By the way - and this came up in a different discussion I had today - a "reputable source" is nothing but an euphemism for a source that screens based on your own filter bubble. Essentially you are not asking for a "source" you are asking implicitly whether or not your own tribe agrees with this new information. (If it's not part of your tribe it isn't "reputable".)

What you should be asking instead is whether or not there is any evidence for the claim. But this is impossible to provide as information over the Internet, as information can be tampered with. So just take it as possibly true until you find corresponding evidence.

A source is just a different origin for the same claim and no evidence.

https://files.catbox.moe/1wvvcn.jpg

Would have preferred a link to a reputable source discussing such things.

Fun fact: I planted over 100 trees this year around my house and have about 1/4 of an acre completely unmaintained / not mowed for about two years ago for rabbits and other animals to hide in. Some of the growth is taller than me now.

As Jeremy Clarkson once said "Work Harder Get a Car".

https://v2.incogtube.com/watch?v=aRxAZLV6vgU

Haven't figured out how to do this, either.

What the heck? How to check/remove this? Can't find a way to do it.

The device on the left ist a spaceball. Specifically the Spaceball 1003.

I blame low IQ people getting themselves killed (a.k.a. Natural Selection) and soccer moms going ballistic.

Not if you keep making them, like feeding covaids hoax.

The mistake is he thinks that religion in general is some kind of scientific area of expertise (in which he is a learned scholar of course) and is a subject to Dunning-Kruger. And hence he can't keep his insights to himself, like a chosen one who is right and everyone else is in the dark. Spiritual pride. Paradoxically, the correct behavior here IS to keep it to yourself, and that is the prime directive which he himself not following through. At least he is forcing objective realism, political mainstream bs and official history.

Oh, mesoamerica. I’m talking about the north.

If the native Americans never had a written language, then what did Michael Coe translate in 1993? See: https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-2004-02-09-0402090119-story.html

OY VEY GOYIM ONLY CHRISTIANITY BAD ALL OTHER RELIGIONS DON’T EVEN DESERVE MENTION

Shit thread. Completely worthless.

Would the Catholic church not have burned all the books of the native Americans and later claimed that they had no written language?

Except they had no written language. None of them. Fuck your revisionism.

:OOOOOOOOOOOO

isn't this just common sense?

sup noob

don’t i know it

Apple is shit.

They're not horrible for short term use, which I think is where they likely shine the most. A quick run or workout at the gym? Sure. A companion to a multi-day backpacking trip? Trail running? Or even just listening to music for 8 hours for a normal work shift? Not so much.

There is definitely a market for them. I see them all the time. People seem to like them, or at least want to be seen with them in. Personal andecote for sure, but I don't recall going to the store or just taking a walk down the street and seeing this many people with wired earbuds just five years ago. I think it has to partially due to marketing and people's desire to be seen with new stuff from the brands they're loyal to. Galaxy Buds and Apple's Airpods are pretty recognizable. Seems almost just as much of a fashion accessory nowadays similar to how Beats headphones were previously.

Interesting... I don't think "are stupid" is a good reason but the other reasons are pretty sound, and you could add they are unhealthy to wear for very long periods of time. On headphone side they are very bulky (not compact).

Must say I do like wireless earbuds though and have not had any of the problems apart from the exorbitant cost based on what you get vs its useful lifetime, and yes some have very short battery time (I've always only chosen 6 - 8 hour models for that reason).

I suppose the look/feel though does come down to personal preference. Wireless earbuds though, do have a lot of room for improvement still.

I use old version of Pale Moon and Chromium for websites requiring a newer browser. Both seems ok.