Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Ankilla out here on some Doctor-level intelligence
CalumSKIif you are smart enough to be a "good" drug dealer, you are smart enough to get a real job
This isnt true in poor countries like mexico, and if you are talking about making alot (alot) of money then normal jobs cant compete with drug dealing.
“
drug money is easy money, not grief”
-Layer Cake
This guy looks like a real assmonkey, he probably smoked so much weed that he cant feel his fucking knee anyways. Go out and huck a few more cliffs. We will see how this works out buddy.
Monsieur_Patatengl I was expecting the OP to be the dumbest thing I'd read in this thread, 2 pages later, I can say we have some serious contenders in here.
bruh it was a joke
**This post was edited on Feb 6th 2020 at 6:45:39pm
DolanReloadedbut how do you explain me? I never did a single math or science homework in middle school or high school. I used to thumb through my textbook reading chapters ahead while everybody else struggled to understand shit i couldve mastered when i was 8 years old. I had basically a 100in math and science classes including the APs which were just as big of a joke. You want to tell me i breezed through all that shite because my parents played beethoven while i was in the womb?
you want to tell me i grew a huge brain from natural breast milk?
get a life loser, youre dumb enough to think iq means nothing because your parents were dumb enough to think the same thing. Like loser liberal parents like loser liberal child.
**This post was edited on Feb 6th 2020 at 4:10:34am
Anyone claiming a superior IQ or advanced learning ability should at least keep their grammar and punctuation in check.
On a side note, I agree that threads about Ankilla have got to stop. The last one turned into a garbage fire.
What’s fucking hilarious is I almost said in here yesterday that his mind is really similar to Trumps. He constantly rants, finds random wild shit to post about, if you say he’s an idiot he’s gonna explode on you and just say you’re stupid. Kids a joke of a human.
Titus69What’s fucking hilarious is I almost said in here yesterday that his mind is really similar to Trumps. He constantly rants, finds random wild shit to post about, if you say he’s an idiot he’s gonna explode on you and just say you’re stupid. Kids a joke of a human.
I asked him why he supports trump and he told me to watch 10 youtube videos
CalumSKII asked him why he supports trump and he told me to watch 10 youtube videos
Sounds like a legitimate reason, watch something most likely brain washing, forget about your human feelings and logical thinking and you’re likely someone who relates to Trump.
BigPurpleSkiSuitIt just hit me we might be looking at the longest and greatest attempt at this:
Nah, I mean the kid preaches only eating fruit, I think a true jokester would tell us he’s kidding about that shit after the first year of being heated on SM seeking attention all the time.
Science is not true or false, it's just facts. Greta is merely relaying those facts from scientific studies, just because you don't understand it does not make it "false".
Ankilla, on the other hand, does not rely on scientific evidence to make his claims, but rather on his own anecdotal evidence/beliefs, do not confuse that with science.
Monsieur_PatateScience is not true or false, it's just facts. Greta is merely relaying those facts from scientific studies, just because you don't understand it does not make it "false".
Ankilla, on the other hand, does not rely on scientific evidence to make his claims, but rather on his own anecdotal evidence/beliefs, do not confuse that with science.
Monsieur_PatateScience is not true or false, it's just facts. Greta is merely relaying those facts from scientific studies, just because you don't understand it does not make it "false".
Ankilla, on the other hand, does not rely on scientific evidence to make his claims, but rather on his own anecdotal evidence/beliefs, do not confuse that with science.
Greta is forming BELIEFS which are entirely subjective, even if they happen to be based on scientific FACT. Climate alarmism is merely a religion.
The scientific data itself is not, it's just data, but scientists can be wrong in the conclusions they draw from the science, sure.
And that's why it's better to trust the scientific consensus around the interpretation of data, because statistically it is what will turn out to be "true" more often than not.
Scientists can still be wrong in their conclusions because they missed a parameter, etc. That's why peer review is essential and therefore what consensus is key in determining "true" from "false", or at least what is the most likely to be true.
Take 100 conspiracy theories, you'll likely get a couple that actually turn out to be true, but the remaining 98 are not. One might use these 2 examples to try and convince people that you should believe conspiracy theories, but the reality is that you'd be right 98% of the time not to believe them.
Greta simply echos what the overwhelming consensus amongst the scientific community is. Can she turn out to be wrong? Maybe, but I'd still take the 98% odds of her being right.
Monsieur_PatateThe scientific data itself is not, it's just data, but scientists can be wrong in the conclusions they draw from the science, sure.
And that's why it's better to trust the scientific consensus around the interpretation of data, because statistically it is what will turn out to be "true" more often than not.
Scientists can still be wrong in their conclusions because they missed a parameter, etc. That's why peer review is essential and therefore what consensus is key in determining "true" from "false", or at least what is the most likely to be true.
Take 100 conspiracy theories, you'll likely get a couple that actually turn out to be true, but the remaining 98 are not. One might use these 2 examples to try and convince people that you should believe conspiracy theories, but the reality is that you'd be right 98% of the time not to believe them.
Greta simply echos what the overwhelming consensus amongst the scientific community is. Can she turn out to be wrong? Maybe, but I'd still take the 98% odds of her being right.
The '98%' number is inherently wrong and purposefully misleading, but I'd expect people to defend their religion is such way that damnnation is the only other option available.
BiffbarfThe '98%' number is inherently wrong and purposefully misleading, but I'd expect people to defend their religion is such way that damnnation is the only other option available.
Is it though? NASA says 95% chance that the alarming and unprecedented rate of global warming is caused by human activity. I'll admit I threw that 98% number out there as a rough estimate of the top of my head, I'll give you that one, it's actually 95% according to NASA.
I simply explained what my personal rationale is when deciding to trust something: I look at the expert consensus, if overwhelming consensus there is, then odds are they are right, so I'll go with that. I also admit that odds are never 100%, so there is still a statistical possibility that they are wrong about climate change and its impacts.
Anyway, I don't want to get into an argument with you on whether or not climate change is real. I'm not really passionate about this topic, and I don't think I could say anything that you haven't heard before anyway.
I made the decision to trust the scientific consensus, you made the decision not to, and that's all fine, you do you, free country buddy.
Monsieur_PatateIs it though? NASA says 95% chance that the alarming and unprecedented rate of global warming is caused by human activity. I'll admit I threw that 98% number out there as a rough estimate of the top of my head, I'll give you that one, it's actually 95% according to NASA.
I simply explained what my personal rationale is when deciding to trust something: I look at the expert consensus, if overwhelming consensus there is, then odds are they are right, so I'll go with that. I also admit that odds are never 100%, so there is still a statistical possibility that they are wrong about climate change and its impacts.
Anyway, I don't want to get into an argument with you on whether or not climate change is real. I'm not really passionate about this topic, and I don't think I could say anything that you haven't heard before anyway.
I made the decision to trust the scientific consensus, you made the decision not to, and that's all fine, you do you, free country buddy.
Never have I once said man made climate change isn't real. I don't think that is a debatable topic. My problem is with the doomsday alarmism. People are SO certain of what MAY happen if things don't change, their beliefs have become religious.
I'm getting sick of being told to carpool and not enjoy a ribeye to save the planet while 500 million people in india don't even have the infrastructure to not shit in the streets or while china largely runs unregulated and produces 1/3 of the earth's carbon emissions.
The west is remarkably clean comparatively, war needs to be waged with the east abd south america if people are serious about the climate and not just stroking themselves off to Instagram-slacktivism.
BiffbarfNever have I once said man made climate change isn't real. I don't think that is a debatable topic. My problem is with the doomsday alarmism. People are SO certain of what MAY happen if things don't change, their beliefs have become religious.
I'm getting sick of being told to carpool and not enjoy a ribeye to save the planet while 500 million people in india don't even have the infrastructure to not shit in the streets or while china largely runs unregulated and produces 1/3 of the earth's carbon emissions.
The west is remarkably clean comparatively, war needs to be waged with the east abd south america if people are serious about the climate and not just stroking themselves off to Instagram-slacktivism.
Fair enough, and I agree that no one can predict with certainty the actual impact, but we can certainly agree that change there is, and that it's not good. So something needs to change if we want to rectify course and avoid the consequences, whatever these may be from mildly bad to worse.
The reality is that you and I (and our western economies) have created this problem. It's not because of China and India that we are here, let's be real for a minute, the reason why China has such a major footprint is because we have them manufacture all the shit we want, so pointing the finger at them isn't really fair.
Sure, it's annoying and inconvenient to change your habits, I get it. I also think carpooling is less convenient and do love a good ribeye, but I don't think it's all or nothing. You can try to carpool when convenient, try to reduce meat consumption (it's also healthier so that one has an added benefit), prefer paper over plastic when given a choice, etc.
At the end of the day, it will certainly take more than us carpooling to swith the tide, it will take systemic changes in regulations and our energy model to really make a difference, that's a fact. So you may be right to think that the inconvenience of changing your habits may not matter anyway, but whenever convenient, I don't see the harm in trying to make an effort.
Monsieur_PatateScience is not true or false, it's just facts. Greta is merely relaying those facts from scientific studies, just because you don't understand it does not make it "false".
Ankilla, on the other hand, does not rely on scientific evidence to make his claims, but rather on his own anecdotal evidence/beliefs, do not confuse that with science.
Dem not fats playa dem lyes fr fr sighence donut proov shi essept sum branewashin ya here dat y iz a theery cuz Dey kno dat Dey can’t folly proov shi naw sey
Yo sum gossipin ass cracka no cap et all u musta miss dat jr skool drama n shit cuz yo out here talkin out yo necks. Fr git n yo lane critisisin ass honkey ass cap talkin cracka wit dem thin papa width lips
ALMIGHTYSOSAYo sum gossipin ass cracka no cap et all u musta miss dat jr skool drama n shit cuz yo out here talkin out yo necks. Fr git n yo lane critisisin ass honkey ass cap talkin cracka wit dem thin papa width lips
ALMIGHTYSOSAYo sum gossipin ass cracka no cap et all u musta miss dat jr skool drama n shit cuz yo out here talkin out yo necks. Fr git n yo lane critisisin ass honkey ass cap talkin cracka wit dem thin papa width lips
did you have a stroke or something? I can't understand you
BiffbarfNever have I once said man made climate change isn't real. I don't think that is a debatable topic. My problem is with the doomsday alarmism. People are SO certain of what MAY happen if things don't change, their beliefs have become religious.
I'm getting sick of being told to carpool and not enjoy a ribeye to save the planet while 500 million people in india don't even have the infrastructure to not shit in the streets or while china largely runs unregulated and produces 1/3 of the earth's carbon emissions.
The west is remarkably clean comparatively, war needs to be waged with the east abd south america if people are serious about the climate and not just stroking themselves off to Instagram-slacktivism.
Before reading this, i would have probably typed up some heated response about cLiMaTe ChAnGe Is ReAl. After though, I have to say I agree with you. It's too easy to just get combative on the internet which is a shame since its the medium in which so many of our important debates are held.
