by GOBLIN7
7
clemaneuverers 7 points ago +7 / -0

I blame the vaccine

3
clemaneuverers 3 points ago +3 / -0

The pic in the post:

https://imgur.com/a/9clrddR

No extreme gore, a few glimpses of blood. I wont link the video because that IS gory. Not sure if the catbox link in the image still works, apparently catbox has been taking it down when uploaded...

5
clemaneuverers 5 points ago +5 / -0

Older versions of the page can be seen here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Recession&oldid=954008074 Going back all the way to the very first article it was prominently defined as a fall in GNP for 2 successive quarters. 2003: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Recession&oldid=755277 At some point that definition was moved down to the bottom of the 1st paragraph and labelled as a "UK definition", as it stands now. There have been almost 100 edits made to the page between 25th and 29th of July: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Recession&offset=20220728142727%7C1100952636&action=history

1
clemaneuverers 1 point ago +1 / -0

Older versions of the page can be seen here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Recession&oldid=954008074

Going back all the way to the very first article it was prominently defined as a fall in GNP for 2 successive quarters.

2003: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Recession&oldid=755277

At some point that definition was moved down to the bottom of the 1st paragraph and labelled as a "UK definition", as it stands now. There have been almost 100 edits made to the page between 25th and 29th of July:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Recession&offset=20220728142727%7C1100952636&action=history

4
clemaneuverers [M] 4 points ago +4 / -0

Thanks!

I'm going to add a permalink to this post in the book list for the moment, until I see if I can fit them all in as individual links. Wiki pages have a character limit, we reached it once already so I might need to add a second page.

1
clemaneuverers 1 point ago +1 / -0

Again, I didn't write that article or thread, I just provided a link because I thought it was interesting. Which it was.

You, however, did come up with the notion that this woman has stolen the identity of one Purnima Wagh... because of a perceived typo... with zero proper searching or evidence to indicate such.. in fact ignoring evidence to the contrary...

lmao. what a loon..

2
clemaneuverers 2 points ago +2 / -0

The whole "if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around, does it make a sound?" is often appropriated by quantum aficionados in modern times, but it is actually a Buddhist rhetorical question, not a quantum theoretical problem. The idea is that, without an ear around to acknowledge the sound (ignoring that this is pretty much not possible on this earth, there is some kind of animal with ears that will always here it), can we say for certain it happened? It's supposed to lead the thinking person to the inevitable conclusion that the only certainty in life is death, not make one wonder if life is a simulation or whatever. The quantum interpretation is scientific appropriation of religion.

How about the universe.. if something exploded from a beginning.. how's that work.. at some point there's none of the shit that exploded

I found a book recently that I'm looking forward to reading:

"The Big Bang Never Happened: A Startling Refutation of the Dominant Theory of the Origin of the Universe" by Eric J. Lerner.

4
clemaneuverers 4 points ago +4 / -0

Photographically speaking it's actually quite a complex topic, even on the ground: the way focus is affected by the curve of the lens used, in relation to the distance, perspective and/or curve of what is being photographed - there are even special lenses used to account for this affect (tilt-shift lenses), BUT, ironically, they are often used in photography and film to PRODUCE the effect where it doesn't appear - so it gets even more complicated:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilt%E2%80%93shift_photography

The effect is often used to make large expansive scenes appear distorted and small, to make landscapes look like they are miniature models, or further away than they are.

6
clemaneuverers 6 points ago +6 / -0

BTW I believe from reading online, that the second actor in that thread, Luka, was the main "conspiracy theorist" in the group - an act to portray truth seekers as ridiculous?

1
clemaneuverers 1 point ago +1 / -0

it's not sensationalist exaggeration at all. The German tweet is playing things down. That is the point of the article.

1
clemaneuverers 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not that it matters much, but the title is directly quoted from the article, I didn't write it. They directly quote the tweet in the article, using the phrases "serious reactions" and "serious side-effects".

2
clemaneuverers 2 points ago +2 / -0

Search her name, correct spelling but without the middle "K", and there are plenty of hits about her allegations. In particular she seems to have upset Steve Kirsch.

Right now I have to assume that someone appropriated her name and misspelled it either deliberately or out of stupidity.

Bizarre that you wouldn't think to do a thorough search before jumping to a crazy conspiracy assumption instead. A little retarded, if you ask me.

2
clemaneuverers 2 points ago +2 / -0

The coastline paradox is the counterintuitive observation that the coastline of a landmass does not have a well-defined length. This results from the fractal curve-like properties of coastlines, i.e., the fact that a coastline typically has a fractal dimension. The first recorded observation of this phenomenon was by Lewis Fry Richardson[1][2] and it was expanded upon by Benoit Mandelbrot

[...] A key property of some fractals is self-similarity; that is, at any scale the same general configuration appears.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox

1
clemaneuverers [M] 1 point ago +1 / -0

If you want to explain how to block other users, that's great; but please do so without singling a particular user out like this - post removed

6
clemaneuverers 6 points ago +6 / -0

This is one of the pure-bloods in the "Unvaccinated" show, says she has some sneaky outtakes filmed that were obviously not included in the Beeb edit that she is going to put online:

https://twitter.com/nazarinveronica/status/1549865350350651394

At least two of the key experts brought in to confront the pure-bloods have conflict of interest, pfizer lackeys:

https://twitter.com/profnfenton/status/1549869744706265097

Also the BBC prominently uses a stat of 8% of the population unvaxxed, but the number is much higher at about 30%, links showing that in the thread above somewhere.

5
clemaneuverers 5 points ago +5 / -0

It's considered "hate speech", because of course it is:

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2022/07/15/groomer-reddit-lgbtq-ban/

I found the link on twitter, so shut up. I rarely go on reddit anymore so it was news to me.

6
clemaneuverers 6 points ago +6 / -0

It's common for the ear lobes to change shape after a face lift or two or three. I hate to be boring but I thinks that's what it is. It explains his increasingly bizarre facial expressions - stretched, taut skin on an old geezer like him makes him look like some kind of lizard person. They subjected him to multiple facelifts and hairplugs etc to make him look more capable looking, and pump him full of drugs to make him seem more coherent. It's sick and desperate and disgusting. Remember how they used to Photoshop Trump without his quiff to try and show what he would look like naturally? A similar photoshop of Biden would be much worse. He's basically the living dead.

6
clemaneuverers 6 points ago +6 / -0

Also the sound of the first gunshots is out of sync with when he raises his rifle, shots happen first while it's still down - does it stay out of sync? Is this just an artifact of the heavy editing the video has undergone?

8
clemaneuverers 8 points ago +8 / -0

The only kid we see ( I think, I'm working my way through the video) is right at the beginning, and it seems odd the way he comes out to sneak a peek at the shooter - a little staged perhaps... just sayin'.

https://youtu.be/OyPTePoiI3M?t=287

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›