Michael Shermer

Decades from now historians, sociologists & linguists will make a list like this as a case study in how, in the early part of the 21st century, the left took liberal tolerance to absurd lengths to the point of illiberalism. (Didn't they have a word for "vagina-haver"?)

UFOs are only UFOs when they're blurry and pixelated. Once they're in-focus and HD, they are no longer UFOs. There's never, ever, been a clear, HD image of an otherworldly UFO behaving in non-human ways. Because they don't exist.

🚨 Matt Gaetz : “There is an ALIEN Hybrid Breeding Program” Rep. Matt Gaetz on what he was told in a classified congressional briefing by a uniformed U.S. Army officer: “I had someone come and brief me who was in a military uniform, worked for the United States Army, that was briefing me on the locations of hybrid breeding programs where captured aliens were breeding with humans to create some hybrid race that could engage in intergalactic communication. An actual uniformed member of the United States Army briefed me on that.” Gaetz added that recovered craft crashes examined by the CIA contained “non-human biologics” with no identifiable human source. This is straight from a sitting Congressman under oath-level clearance. No speculation — just what he says he was officially briefed. What do you make of it? 👇 ---

Trump's approval rating just fell below 40 percent in our tracking for the first time. And his net approval rating is now -17.4, also a new low and down about 5 points over the past several weeks.

All the large accounts that present themselves as truth-seeking journalists or commentators, then quote posts like this and act utterly baffled—“What the hell!?” “WTF!?” “What’s going on here???”—are frauds. It took me less than a minute to see what the court documents actually said and understand what they meant. They do not show that the bullet was not fired from the gun. They show only that the bullet was too fragmented to confidently link it to ANY gun. This is not uncommon, and DOES NOT mean the bullet didn’t come from Robinson’s gun. Of course the defense attorneys are going to spin this as evidence that Robinson is innocent. That is what defense attorneys do. They scrape together every possible fragment of doubt and present it as if it were fully exculpatory. It’s not. Defense lawyers are paid to downplay or ignore evidence pointing to guilt, exploit people’s cognitive biases, and make fallacious arguments sound persuasive. This information about the bullet doesn’t erode the case for Robinson’s guilt in any way. It is totally neutral on that front. And it in no way invalidate the mountain of positive and mutually corroborating lines of evidence we do have for Robinson’s guilt. You should expect more from the commentators you follow, and hold them accountable by refusing to give them your attention in the future. If they could not be bothered to spend even one minute checking the facts before spreading confusion to you and millions of others on X, they do not deserve your attention. They are nothing more than grifting engagement farmers.