placeholder

That's quite an honest, impartial source you cited.. Somehow, he forget to note this: "The results revealed higher heart disease risk in individuals receiving mRNA vaccines than other types (adjusted HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.35-1.62). Individuals infected by SARS-CoV-2 also exhibited significantly higher heart disease risk than those uninfected (adjusted HR, 3.56; 95% CI, 1.15-11.04)." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39444354/ The HR, which stands for Hazard Ratio, is over twice as high for those infected by covid.

Now that you've taken your victory lap, maybe you should ask AI about women who were denied abortions when their fetus miscarried due to the imprecise language of those laws and the reluctance of doctors to risk fines and imprisonment. A dramatic rise in pregnant women dying in Texas after abortion ban Exclusive analysis finds the rate of maternal deaths in Texas increased 56% from 2019 to 2022, compared with just 11% nationwide during the same time period. https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/texas-abortion-ban-deaths-pregnant-women-sb8-analysis-rcna171631 But, it's understandable why doctors are reluctant: When pregnancy becomes an emergency In the 13 U.S. states that ban abortion and in the others that severely restrict it, such cases unfold amid physicians’ fear of punishment and confusion over exemptions like those to save a patient’s life. In Texas, for example, a doctor deemed to have performed an illegal abortion faces up to 99 years in prison. “ED staff sometimes are afraid to perform any sort of procedure, such as those for miscarriage management, that could be interpreted as ending a pregnancy, even though these are not elective abortions,” says Atsuko Koyama, MD, an emergency medicine (EM) physician in Arizona. https://www.aamc.org/news/emergency-doctors-grapple-abortion-bans

Another self-proclaimed winner.

I don't think you created it, But how do we know how up to date it is? For all we know it could be 10 years old. There's a reason the rules require us to include links. It's about the quality of evidence. Although, I don't think that's much of a consideration for you. And I could care less about the Sharia Law aspect of it.

Thanks for not sharing a link to what you posted. That lack should greatly bolster everyone's confidence in it.

Thank you for sharing your addled and paranoid take on this: Zelenskyy, BlackRock CEO Fink agree to coordinate Ukraine investment BlackRock Financial Markets Advisory and the Ukrainian Ministry of Economy signed a memorandum of understanding in November. Zelenskyy and Fink agreed Wednesday to “focus in the near term on coordinating the efforts of all potential investors and participants in the reconstruction of our country, channelling investment into the most relevant and impactful sectors of the Ukrainian economy. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/28/zelenskyy-blackrock-ceo-fink-agree-to-coordinate-ukraine-investment.html

EU emissions fall by 8% in steep reduction reminiscent of Covid shutdown Decline over 2023, helped by switch to renewable power, means greenhouse gas pollution is now 37% below 1990 levels The EU’s greenhouse gas emissions fell 8% last year, the European Environment Agency (EEA) has found, as the continent continues to close down coal-fired power plants and make more electricity from sun and wind. The steep drop in planet-heating pollution in 2023 is close to the fall recorded in Europe at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, when travel restrictions grounded planes and shuttered factories. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/31/eu-emissions-fall-by-8-in-steep-reduction-reminiscent-of-covid-shutdown The EU has steadily decreased its greenhouse gas emissions since 1990. In 2023, net emissions were 37% below 1990 levels. The EU's GDP has grown by 68% over the same period. The EU achieved a net 8% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in 2023 compared to the previous year. https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/climate-strategies-targets/progress-climate-action_en#:~:text=The EU has steadily decreased,compared to the previous year.

Sure. Because everyone has millions and millions of dollars.

Tucker Carlson credits demons for the invention of nuclear technology Demons that Tucker Carlson claimed attacked him as he slept were also responsible for the invention of nuclear technology, the conservative former Fox News host said on Monday in another bizarre contention. Carlson made the claim on the War Room podcast hosted by his fellow rightwing extremist Steve Bannon, a former White House adviser in the Trump administration who was released from prison last week after serving a four-month sentence for contempt of Congress. “Nuclear weapons are demonic, there’s no upside to them at all, and anyone who claims otherwise is either ignorant or doing the bidding of the forces that created nuclear technology in the first place, which were not human forces obviously,” Carlson said during a discussion on the perceived “spirituality” involved in the US development of atomic bombs that were dropped on Japan in August 1945, hastening the end of the second world war. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/04/tucker-carlson-demon-war-room-podcast In the interests of fairness, it should be pointed out that Carlson never claimed that it was the demons who assaulted him in his bed and the demons who created nuclear technology were the same ones. So, not crazy at all. Not in the least bit. Nothing to see here.

False. Trump would have it in his power to restrict the use of mifepristone which is one of the 2 drugs used to chemically induce an abortion along with misoprostol It can be done with misoprostol alone but it's more effective when both are used. Of course, the FDA can also take steps to make it more difficult to acquire misoprostol. In addition to which a Harris Presidency could result in the reversal of the Dobbs decision if conservative justices leave the court to be replaced by progressive ones.

Had you bothered to educate yourself and read the article, you would have learned that Ann Selzer, who runs this poll, correctly predicted Trump's percentage of the votes in both 2016 and 2020. In both cases she predicted much more accurate results than did most other pollsters. You would also know that very few polls have been taken of the Iowa electorate re the presidential race. From September onward there have only been 3 polls not explicitly aligned with Democrats or Republicans. (The polls marked with a red diamond are affiliated with Republicans). So, how could her poll be an outlier? https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/iowa/ It doesn't mean that the Selzer poll is correct. Even the best polls, of which hers is one, can be badly wrong about 5% of the time.

Whether you are voting or not is impossible to determine. However, the one candidate you consistently criticize is Harris. So. please, spare us your pretensions to neutrality.

"Typically the final Des Moines Register poll before Election Day is widely anticipated for its unique ability to predict the result. This year, it was mostly being ignored, since neither candidate this year is competing for Iowa’s electoral votes. But the result — Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump, 47 percent to 44 percent, within the margin of error — raised eyebrows as soon as it was posted to the Register’s website Saturday night. https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/11/02/2024-elections-live-coverage-updates-analysis/shock-iowa-poll-00186935

The Health Survey for England 2021 estimates that 25.9% of adults in England are obese and a further 37.9% are overweight but not obese... The survey, published in December 2022, found that men are more likely than women to be overweight or obese (68.6% of men, 59.0% of women). People aged 45-74 are most likely to be overweight or obese. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn03336/#:~:text=Adult obesity in England&text=Obesity is usually defined as,%2C 59.0% of women).

What said in confidential negotiations is clearly a different thing from spinning or denying history. I can explain the difference to you, if you like.

I have given you no commands. I simply pointed out a defect in your understanding of how to ascertain whether something is valid evidence or not. You can, of course, ignore it.

And they also denied they killed khashoggi. How nice can you be? Obviously, extremely.

One way excellent way of ascertaining whether something is a fact or not is if sources who usually disagree, agree about something. It's a technique used by historians. Yet you seem don't care. Your emotional engagement is irrelevant. But on the other hand lack of mention from a Congressional report strikes you being significant. Who knows what agenda the authors might have?

https://archive.ph/FotiX The link above is from Haaretz. That means I've offered reports from three different Israeli media sources that are right wing, centrist, and left wing. They all agree that the Saudis were willing to abandon their insistence on the creation of a Palestinian state in order to pursue peace with Israel. Against which you offer report from the US Congress. It is to laugh.

Time marches on. Compare the dates of that report to the dates of mine

You said my claim was false. Here are your own words: "When did Saudi Arabia make those alleged new demands ?" Saudi have always favoured a two state solution and its not a new requirement , your article is wrong about the claims that its a new demand from Saudi , as it has ALWAYS been the Saudi position." I provided evidence. You say you'll take my word for it rather than from an independent source? I guess I should be flattered by such foolishness. You've been well and truly caught out. But instead of acknowledging the evidence from independent sources you take refuge in some lame claim that you prefer an anonymous member's word to sources such as the Jerusalem Post and the Israel Times. Have you been hiding in the tunnel these past few years? These negotiations were all over the news. How could you have missed reports about protests by Palestinians about having their rights ignored the negotiations during these negotiations?

https://m.jpost.com/israel-news/article-760980 https://www.timesofisrael.com/saudis-putting-aside-arab-peace-initiative-amid-israel-normalization-talks-officials/ https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/09/1141302 https://www.reuters.com/world/us-saudi-defence-pact-tied-israel-deal-palestinian-demands-put-aside-2023-09-29/

Can you please teleport the evidence from the alternative universe you live in to prove your case? It seems very odd, though, that someone who campaigns on a platform of America First and sets himself firmly against foreign interventions, somehow will be able to dissuade other nations from engaging in warfare. Will he launch his formidable power of ridicule against them?

I remember you once "outed" Chester Crocker" for being Jewish. And over and over again you've cited Jewish ethnicity as a reason not to trust different people's takes on the situation.

Wow, an endorsement from an antisemite for my comment against bigotry!