A Non-e Mouse
@usedlobsterdealer.bsky.social
135 Followers
131 Following
Considering following me? Be forewarned that I’ll probably post something at some point you will hate. I’m here to share my opinions, and I will do so as I see fit. Do me the courtesy of unfollowing before you block and/or mute me. Thanks. 🤪🥴🥜
-
-
This all day long, and every day.
-
[Pan left] On the other side of the hedge is another introvert also creeping on the chat.
[Cut to aerial shot] Miles long hedge with creepers.
Narrator: The introvert creeper hedges are getting crowded.
[Title appears] The Social World of the Internet
-
Yet another reason we need to make a very particular type turtle soup.
-
I know Bondi really wants to be able to actually prosecute people for not worshipping Donnie Dirty Diaper. I also know I don’t support fascists, pedophiles, and definitely not fascist pedophiles. I have my 2nd Amendment right to resist government tyranny for when that caption becomes reality.
-
So, is he trying to defend people from cultural appropriation (which it isn’t)? Is he saying simple courtesy gestures to Muslims shouldn’t be observed (they should)? Which would make you happy Ted? Neither, because you are just a headline chasing nitwit trying to remain relevant by trolling Dems. 🤦🏻
-
Yeah, because we all know that the FAA is all about weak licensing rules for commercial pilots. Just the other day, I spent fifteen minutes standing next to a picture of an A380, and the FAA mailed me a pilot’s license with a certification for the A380. Totally true story. I swear on my Trump Bible.
-
Science is a means of observing and interpreting, to the best of our ability with the knowledge we have, the world as we experience it. Yes, a great deal of human beliefs, especially religious thought, are nonsense. The dishonesty of Dawkinsism arises from refuting nonsense with expert nonsense.
-
If something physically provable, but as yet unstudied by “authoritative” scientific experts, while believed (rightly) by supposedly ignorant, primitive people is just superstition until granted legitimacy through those experts, how can claims for any elusive thing be definitively disproved?
-
Arguments against belief, religious or otherwise, founded only in “disproving” those beliefs offering only evidence that said beliefs don’t manifest measurable phenomena as claimed is hardly rigorous. Was the claims of large, man-like apes in Africa superstition only until Science found gorillas?
