No drugs, other than caffeine and occasionally ibuprofen, and a drink once or twice a month. I do take creatine when I work out, but that’s a supplement, not a drug. I don’t know what you mean by “true belief,” but you’ve posted precisely 0 sources and ignored mountains of evidence contrary to your own fantasy-level blood libel.
No? You haven’t presented any evidence whatsoever. If you actually posted evidence, or meaningfully contested the evidence I presented without making up conspiracy theories, then we could have a discussion. It isn’t true because I link it or false because you do, I’m the only one presenting evidence while you’ve ignored it.
No no, see, they did make a bunch of claims as evidence. They may not have provided any sources for those claims and haven’t proven those claims true. But they did provide a lot of claims and say that it is evidence of something.
That we require it to be more rigorous than that is not their problem
What kind of drugs do you do? I need some of this ‘true belief’ shit you are smoking.
No drugs, other than caffeine and occasionally ibuprofen, and a drink once or twice a month. I do take creatine when I work out, but that’s a supplement, not a drug. I don’t know what you mean by “true belief,” but you’ve posted precisely 0 sources and ignored mountains of evidence contrary to your own fantasy-level blood libel.
according to you any evidence i present is false because i present it. and according to you any evidence you present is true because you present it.
weird how that works.
No? You haven’t presented any evidence whatsoever. If you actually posted evidence, or meaningfully contested the evidence I presented without making up conspiracy theories, then we could have a discussion. It isn’t true because I link it or false because you do, I’m the only one presenting evidence while you’ve ignored it.
you are just quoting propaganda. repeatedly. and claiming it’s evidence.
then when i claim something as evidence, you claim it’s propaganda, not evidence.
and around and around we go.
No? I cited a broad variety of academic scholarship and primary sources, you never linked any sources to begin with.
No no, see, they did make a bunch of claims as evidence. They may not have provided any sources for those claims and haven’t proven those claims true. But they did provide a lot of claims and say that it is evidence of something.
That we require it to be more rigorous than that is not their problem
I was genuinely hoping they weren’t saying their claims were evidence, but I fear you’re 100% correct here.