BLM (Buster of Liberal Myths)

@mathewguy6 @1bv_radar @elonmusk Umm, I didn't call it "math" nor claim to provide equations, you did. I'm simply pointing out that "math" is unrelated to your fallacious arguments. Funny thing is you haven't debunked a damn thing I said. You offered some conflicting studies and bitched about sample size.

@1classic_lib @1bv_radar @elonmusk Imagine calling it "math" while providing 0.00 equations. 😭 ​I guess "standard statistical plateau" is just the new academic way of saying "I trust my Echo Chamber more than my eyes." Let me know when the calculator finishes its imaginary long division.

Major

@mathewguy6 @1bv_radar @elonmusk I'm hung up on grammar? You're the one who felt the need to inject it into the conversation. I am just addressing the mindset of people who like you who do that. You also seem very triggered by "busting liberal myths" but I didn't claim I busted a myth here.

It’s funny you’re hung up on grammar when your logic is currently in a coma. ​You’re citing "evidence" that has the statistical weight of a Twitter poll, then acting like you’ve cracked the Da Vinci Code. It’s not a "liberal myth," it’s just basic math. Maybe spend less time "busting" and more time auditing a Community College stats class.

@mathewguy6 @1bv_radar @elonmusk Um, I never once called it a busted myth, you lying POS. Roughly 5 people, huh? Interesting, seems like a liberal myth.

Imagine thinking a 2024 survey which hasn't even finished its full reporting cycle—is a definitive trend. 🤡 ​You're looking at a noisy, sub-sampled slice of a specific election study and calling it a "busted myth." Newsflash: when your sample size for 2006 births is roughly five people in a basement, the graph is going to look like a cliff.

@mathewguy6 @1bv_radar @elonmusk Of course I am right, grammar Nazi. Sorry, my link had multiple sources, and I provided it 2 different ways. Cope harder.

You’re right, it’s not about the grammar—it’s about the fact that you’re citing a graph that looks like a EKG of a caffeine overdose. ​"I have cited exactly zero vibes." ​Correct. You’ve also cited exactly zero sources. At least "vibes" have a mood; these lines just have an identity crisis.

@xo_Bambita @Gr82BA10ACVol @Provokethoughtz Actually they have everything to do with real world situations. They give a far clearer picture of the real world than your tiny anecdote. If you neighbor says labradors are bad because one bit her, but stats show only 1 of 100 labs bite people, what are you going to believe?

@1classic_lib @Gr82BA10ACVol @Provokethoughtz Statistics have nothing to do with real world situations you can’t be that fucking stupid.

@mathewguy6 @1bv_radar @elonmusk Why would I have to hide, when you are the one choosing incorrect words? I hide from nothing and stand by the comparison. I showed you multiple studies. You claim other studies differ. So be it. There will be more studies, and time will tell. Common sense says the fad is waning.

When the Buster of Liberal Myths is busted, incarceration is the only argument left. 🎯 ​You're hiding behind the semantics of "compare vs. equate" because you have zero rebuttal for the fact that your "rapid decline" was a basic math error. ​Using unweighted raw data for a longitudinal study is a statistical rookie mistake. When independent researchers re-ran those same numbers with actual weighting, the "drop" vanished—showing a stable plateau, not a fading fad. You didn't bust a myth; you just forgot your calculator.

@Mintslice2 @Donmega67 @S_D_Mannix @HorrorGorl Hey dipshit, please stop lecturing me on the constitution, because you have already proven beyond all reasonable doubt that you are fucking clueless on the topic. You are the posterchild for this idiom:

@1classic_lib @Donmega67 @S_D_Mannix @HorrorGorl Like what? It's completely constitutional to "forcibly confiscate" taxpayer money and distribute it to those in need. What specifics make it OK with you?

The most cruel and sadistic comments you will ever receive are literally always from someone with a Bible verse in their bio

@Mintslice2 @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Show full context. Keep trying.

@1classic_lib @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl It's right here, lmfao.

@Mintslice2 @Donmega67 @S_D_Mannix @HorrorGorl A leftist's idea of what constitutes a "person in need" stretches well beyond what rational people consider "needs". E.g., your liberty did not increase because my money was forcibly confiscated so you could by Twinkies and carbonated sugar water with food stamps. Cope.

@1classic_lib @Donmega67 @S_D_Mannix @HorrorGorl And noooo........ any form of taxation effects taxpayer liberty, but for what? To fucking help those in need m8, which increases their liberty. It's also completely constitutional to "forcibly confiscate" taxpayer money for distribution to those in need. Cope.

@Mintslice2 @Donmega67 @S_D_Mannix @HorrorGorl Please do. Be sure to show the full context while you are at it. Thanks.

@1classic_lib @Donmega67 @S_D_Mannix @HorrorGorl I might make this my new display picture. LMFAO

@Mintslice2 @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl You are one pathetic sad sack. The "general welfare" clause has been egregiously abused and deliberately MISinterpreted beyond all logic, by "progressives", for over a century. So you lecturing me on the constitution, is like King George lecturing the FF on limited govt.

@1classic_lib @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Article I section 8 "To tax and spend for the general welfare" You don't even know your own constitution, which is weird for a self-proclaimed constitutional conservative. Roads = constitutional Pensions = forcible confiscation Is totally bullshit unconstitional diahrea

@Mintslice2 @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Of course the constitution was man made, imbecile. No one claimed otherwise. The aforementioned "enlightened thinkers" created it. They created it to protect God given/natural rights.

@1classic_lib @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl A bunch of your founding fathers were enlightenment thinkers, and your constitution promotes a separation of church and state. They didn't believe your rights were "endowed by our creator".... is this a joke? The constitution was man made, not ordained by God.

@Mintslice2 @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Actually my ancestors had the exact same God given rights as me, they simply lacked a constitution that protected those rights. Is it starting to make sense yet? Maybe you need to get a book on the basics of the constitution.

@1classic_lib @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl You just brought it up...... "Rights were endowed by our creator" No they fucking weren't Your ancestors had completely different rights to the people present in the bible. There's no objective rights m8. It's all man made. Hence why free speech wasn't in the constitution.

@Mintslice2 @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Wrong, dipshit, I never brought up religion, Are you ever right about anything? Stop trying to portray yourself as some great expert/defender of the constitution, if you can't even grasp/accept the basic premise.

@Mintslice2 @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Ffs, have you never heard of the concept of federalism?

@1classic_lib @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl You clearly need money to fund retirees and disabled people as well. If you had a disabled child and you were unable to work and provide them with money, would you agree that the public should contribute some of their income to ensure your child doesn't live in misery?

@Mintslice2 @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Yes. Also includes right to refuse: Whites Short people Mullet hair cuts Soccer fans Marxists Nazis... The great part is it is 2026, and businesses who tried this would suffer immensely, and people could simply go across the street and eat at Wendy's or Pizza Hut.

@1classic_lib @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Lmfao. So mcdonalds should be legally allowed to refuse service to all black people just because they have black skin?

@Mintslice2 @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Again, owning slaves was never a constitutional individual liberty. As the matter of fact, laws that allowed for it were markedly unconstitutional. So it did not come at the expense of constitutional individual liberty, but the expense of unconstitutional legal slave ownership.

@1classic_lib @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Individual slave owners had their freedom to own people removed, but WAY more people based on their group identity were given liberty. So is that an example of you not wanting social justice at the expense of individual liberty? Or?

@Mintslice2 @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Ffs, your perpetual need to ask leading questions w/ obvious answers, in order to obtain some big gotcha moment is crazy. Is this because I kept exposing your flaming hypocrisy? You need to seek out hypocrisy in my positions? Hint: everyone has some, mine are just less egregious

@1classic_lib @S_D_Mannix @Donmega67 @HorrorGorl Does removing people's ability to own slaves cause more harm to liberty than freeing slaves?

@mathewguy6 @1bv_radar @elonmusk More "vibes".

@1classic_lib @1bv_radar @elonmusk Buster of Myths? More like Buster of Moods. It’s not about the grammar, it’s about the fact that your 'evidence' is as imaginary as your restraint. But sure, keep a tally of my fallacies while you continue to cite 'the vibes' as your primary source.