Kaden

@MartaJuch @Sam_Masemula @unusual_whales “Adverse event” ≠ “side effect” Adverse events are self-reported medical incidents that occurred after receiving a drug. There is no causal nor correlated relationship established by listing something as an adverse event. You seem to be illiterate.

@kjohnson_98 @Sam_Masemula @unusual_whales x.com/TheProjectUnit…

BREAKING: 23 hantavirus cruise passengers returned home to 'all corners,' including to the US, and one is already sick, per NYP

@MartaJuch @Sam_Masemula @unusual_whales It’s already spread from person-to-person, as the Andes hantavirus is known to do.

@Sam_Masemula @unusual_whales And that, ladies and gentlemen is exactly why this entire story is one big bull.

@sushi_travel99 @CollinRugg My employer paid someone mid-six-figures after they threatened to sue for pregnancy discrimination. They were never pregnant and had not told anyone that they intended to be.

@CollinRugg Why would JP Morgan want to settle if the allegation is completely baseless though ?

NEW: Former banker Chirayu Rana was offered $1 million by JPMorgan to settle his s*x slave allegations, which he countered at ~$12 million. The development comes as it has been revealed that Rana was referred for mental health treatment by the Manhattan DA's office. According to the WSJ, following weeks of mediation, JPMorgan sent a $1 million settlement offer to Rana and his lawyers in March. "We did try to reach an agreement to avoid the time and expense of litigation and to support an employee who was being threatened with the very reputational harm now unfolding," a spokesman for the bank said. "We continue to believe these allegations have no merit and new information raised as a result of the public filing only reinforces that conclusion." New reporting also reveals that the Manhattan DA's office referred Rana for mental health treatment after he alleged that he was traumatized by his boss. According to the New York Post, Rana sent an email to a therapist in June, saying he could hear Lorna Hajdini’s voice inside his head, saying he had "recurrent nightmares" about the alleged assaults.

@LukeMichael3232 @_TheRoch_ “There are more angles” *Can’t see the forearm *Can’t see when Rudy loses possession

@_TheRoch_ @kjohnson_98 @VatorSports @BiasedHouston If you watch the whole video there are more angles

So Hakeem Olajuwon’s playoff record of 10 blocks still stands.

@aggie_stan @bballbreakdown @ayden_5_ @WembyAlienEra That’s really the best argument in favor of this particular call not mattering lol

@kjohnson_98 @bballbreakdown @ayden_5_ @WembyAlienEra You arguing all this like Rudy wouldn’t just brick the free throws either way lol

Via @bballbreakdown: “The replay angle clearly shows Wemby gets his fingertips to the ball and dislodge it first, therefore that contact to the arm is deemed marginal and correctly not called as a foul.” #GoSpursGo #PorVida

@bballbreakdown @ayden_5_ @WembyAlienEra You are making two different arguments here. 1) it was not a foul - despite video replay indicating that possession was lost concurrent with or after contact with the forearm (which is a foul). 2) refs are fallible - which is fine, but doesn’t mean the play was clean.

And like I said in the video, it was completely clear that the ball is dislodged from that contact. And that's all that matters. Freeze frames do not help us in this endeavor. If you're unwilling to accept how the rules work and are processed by pro refs, it's a free country, but you wont be accurate and that's all I care about. And if that's where you want to be, then there's no use continuing to reply

@bballbreakdown @ayden_5_ @WembyAlienEra The only angle that has all relevant data is the crosscourt view - and as I’ve said, there is not a single frame that shows the ball dislodged prior to contact with the forearm.

@bballbreakdown @ayden_5_ @WembyAlienEra You mean the other angles where you can’t see the contact with the forearm and can’t see possession of the ball?

@bballbreakdown @ayden_5_ @WembyAlienEra “Which directly leads to the ball being dislodged” is not something you can argue using video. You can believe that is what happened, but there isn’t a frame of video that you an use to refutes the claim that contact with the arm (not the ball) is what caused it to be dislodged.

We simply cannot try to point to 1/60th of a second to make any kind of point about this play. There is clean contact to the ball, which directly leads to the ball being dislodged. That's how the human eye processes these things, making it even more remarkable when replay shows they got it right

@bballbreakdown @ayden_5_ @WembyAlienEra There isn’t a single frame that shows that the ball was dislodged or that Rudy lost control prior to contact with the arm. Contact with the ball doesn’t not negate a foul or a violation if the shooter maintains possession. Same applies to the Barnes “block”.

@ayden_5_ @WembyAlienEra That's not how the rules work, unfortunately

@LukeMichael3232 @VatorSports @BiasedHouston The frame where he says the ball was “dislodged”, Wemby is making contact with Rudy’s arm. It is the illegal contact which caused the dislodging, not the “block”.

@VatorSports @BiasedHouston Ref broke down every block- only one goaltend… no fouls

@A1_sinceDay111 @DaneMooreNBA McDaniels came off the bench and Naz didn’t play much that series.

@DaneMooreNBA he wasnt there the first playoffs in 22

Asked Rudy Gobert if he sees Anthony Edwards, Jaden McDaniels and Naz Reid to be at a different maturity level than they were for their first playoff runs. "For sure. When I got there, they were still almost teenagers... Now they're in that stage where you really mature. And being in the playoffs the last three years and going through all kind of different experiences and high pressure situations. You can only learn from that. And we are hungry to win."

@LukeMichael3232 @WhyWeDrinkHere @ESPNInsights If that shot had gone in, it wouldn’t have been a block at all. A credited “block” that left the ball still in the shooters hand and which didn’t seem to significantly alter the shot shouldn’t justifiably negate a goaltend.

@WhyWeDrinkHere @ESPNInsights The first was a Harrison Barnes block. Not a goaltend

Victor Wembanyama is the first player with 6+ blocks in three-straight playoff games since Shawn Bradley in 2001 😤

@JacksonNBA6 @Deckhand838 @DaneMooreNBA Naz’s shot appeared to be on the way down (based on the only film angle available) Ball was still in Randles hand on Barnes “block” and he controlled it enough to put the correct spin on it going up - I’d call that a goaltend Ant’s was close - tough to say without replay

@Deckhand838 @DaneMooreNBA No it’s cuz it’s clearly just gamesmanship. They do this about the OKC foul baiting too. There was one missed goaltend on Shannon that was it.

Rudy Gobert when asked how many of Victor Wembanyama's 12 blocks were goaltends. "He fouled me on the first one. But if you look at them, probably three or four. I wish I had that type of treatment too."

@spurs_v @FavLibertarian @LoLowlights Barnes hit it but Randle maintained control. Unless there is a rule I’m not aware of, blocking a shot coming off the backboard with a chance to go is a goaltend. If that is a goaltend, then you wipe the block on Randle’s ensuing shot.

@FavLibertarian @LoLowlights Barnes actually hit is first and attributed the block on that Randle one. Lmao

The MAJORITY of Wemby’s 12 blocks in Game 1 were either uncalled fouls or goaltends. HISTORICAL NIGHT…for the refs 😭

@JaceFrederick If Wemby’s tip after Randles shot hit the backboard was considered a goaltend, then he wouldn’t have had the opportunity to block the ensuing shot. Aside from that, there was on obvious one vs TJ and three that could have been but don’t have replays (vs TJ, vs Naz, vs Ant).

Just watched the 12 blocks again… you’d have a pretty tough time getting to 4 goaltends (No one send the Harrison Barnes block that was correctly attributed to Harrison Barnes and doesn’t count toward Wembanyama’s 12)

@BowieTheus “Freeing Christians” in lands occupied by Muslims for centuries prior is a real stretch of the truth. Massive territorial gains and the establishment of new colonies are not characteristics of defensive wars.

@BowieTheus It’s dishonest to characterize the crusades as being only against militant Muslims when many campaigns were launched against non-Muslims (e.g., pagans, Cathars, Balts, etc.). Traveling thousands of miles to conquer Jerusalem was not defensive - many other campaigns also were not

Here’s what happened with the debate situation. I’m happy to release the emails if the involved parties claim I’ve misrepresented anything. @CapturingChrist @emuse1955 The original invitation from Cameron was for me to debate Ethan on whether Joseph Smith was a false prophet. Ethan then clarified that he wanted to focus on Joseph’s moral character and the moral circumstances of his revelations. I suggested we debate whether a naturalistic explanation for the Book of Mormon was plausible. Ethan responded that he already agrees the Book of Mormon is not naturalistically explicable. He thinks it was “preternatural,” and later clarified that his position would be that a malevolent entity better explains the Book of Mormon than God. He continued pressing for a debate on Joseph’s moral character. I said I would do that debate if we also compared Joseph’s moral character/actions with the moral character/actions of Catholic leadership throughout history. Ethan declined that topic and suggested we compare Joseph’s character to specific individuals he had in mind from his faith tradition. I responded by asserting that the whole moral character of Catholic leadership would be relevant. Ethan then proposed: “Is the moral character of Joseph Smith a bigger problem for Mormonism than the moral character of historical popes is for Catholicism?” I responded by saying I would prefer to debate the Book of Mormon prompt. I believed I had made it clear that the character arguments on both sides were going to be set aside. I later realized that was not the case. We came to the resolution: “The Book of Mormon is inspired of God, rather than the devil” Ethan agreed, and we set a day and time. Throughout that day, I began looking through Ethan’s X posts to better understand him and his position, since I had first heard of him only a few days earlier. As I did, I realized the debate was likely going to become the original Joseph Smith character debate repackaged under a Book of Mormon title. The next morning, I emailed and asked for two things: first, to push the debate back a month because of my schedule leading up to the original date; and second, to have a discussion with Ethan beforehand so we could better understand each other’s positions before the debate and prepare accordingly. I made it clear that I was not asking for a word-for-word preview of his opening statement. I also made it clear that I would share my position openly. Both requests were declined. I believe the best debates happen when both parties understand the other person’s position, rather than when either side is hoping to surprise the other with a “slam dunk.” I also think it’s both irresponsible and unwise to enter into a debate before you actually understand the position of the person you’re debating. I think I made that mistake and take full responsibility for doing so. I then posted an apology for accepting too quickly before the angle and scope of the debate were clear. I do not apologize for wanting to better understand my opponent’s position before jumping into a debate with him. And given how the situation has been framed since then, I’m confident I made the right decision. Okay, enough online drama for today. Go touch grass, everyone lol.

@BowieTheus Crusades resulted in millions of deaths. Sale of indulgences (remission of sins or forgiveness of sins granted in exchange for money) funded several of the crusade campaigns. Which of the above is incorrect?

@kjohnson_98 The "murdering of millions funded by the sale of forgiveness of sins"?? What? LOL. Is that what you really think happened as a matter of history? Dude, step away from the crack pipe.

@BowieTheus The murdering of millions funded by the sale of forgiveness of sins isn’t “personal moral failings” - that organizational, widespread corruption indicative of significant departure from God (i.e., apostacy)

@kjohnson_98 @boggs_is_cringe @RestoredTruth8 @Lets_Talk_HC @CapturingChrist @emuse1955 No, to believe the papacy is to believe the promises and assurances of Jesus Christ despite the personal moral failings of any one of Peter's successors.