placeholder

Another person a alleging themselves to have a high IQ but somehow doesn't understand the need for evidence to back up their claim.

Do you understand what cherry picking means? The article cited the three latest polls. You got that? Not one but three. Now a person with a high IQ would try to offer evidence that there were other polls taken about the same time that had sharply different results. Or, perhaps, they would some evidence that these three polls, or some subset of them, have a history of bias. In other words, a person with an IQ ranging from 127 to 143 would offer something called evidence. They woould definitely not believe that offering a negative characterization unbacked by evidence would have any dispositive value.

Canada's ruling Liberals mount a comeback with Trump threats, polls show OTTAWA, Feb 26 (Reuters) - Canada's ruling Liberals, who a few weeks ago looked certain to lose an election this year, are mounting a major comeback amid the threat of U.S. tariffs and are tied with their rival Conservatives, according to three new polls. An Ipsos survey released late on Tuesday showed the left-leaning Liberals have 38% public support and the official opposition right-of-center Conservatives have 36%. The Liberals have overturned a 26-point deficit in six weeks, and run advertisements comparing the Conservative leader to Trum https://archive.ph/R3sZu

Yes. Their conduct is disgraceful compared to the open society that is Russia.

Given the recent events vis-a-vis Putin and Trump, and Trump's attitude towards economicallyl advanced nations, the question ought to be "To be a Maga supporter, is it a prerequisite to hate democracies?"

What was truly impressive about this was the way Musk & Co. openly acknowledged their errors and promised in the future to be more transparent and...oh wait a minute...

One demonstration of high IQ would be to provide analysis to back up a reputation. No evidence of any analysis in your comment.

The nation’s biggest egg producer has seen rising revenues and profits. Now some Democrats are calling for an investigation into pricing practices in the industry https://archive.ph/GuAkw

Another irrelevant comment. Not exactly demonstrative of an above average IQ.

When you do post facts they're usually irrelevant. Like the one you used in this thread to support that claim that Trump's approval rating wasn't declining. Produce some evidence from this thread that shows I lied.

Or maybe I could just photoshop results. How to prove that you didn't. Actually, given the foolishness of your comments that depend on mathematical reasoning, it's not likely that you could photoshop those test results. More likely that you got someone to do it for you.

I back up those comments with apt evidence. Whereas on the rare occasions when you offer evidence, it's almost invariably irrelevant or false.

there you go again. I said my IQ must fall within a range higher than yours and you decide that means 95-99. So funny.

What was Biden's rating on Feb 26, 2021 and what is Trump's rating today?

In your case, posting irrelevant facts and making personal comments.

Your comments give me all the data I need. They are certainly inconsistent with someone claiming an IQ of between 127 and 143. But given that I immediately saw through the faulty evidence that you offered, that must mean that I have an IQ higher that falls within a higher range than yours. Or would, if I actually credited the significance of your so-called "evidence".

I have taken to insulting people who engage in making personal comments. Demonstrate that you can keep your comments confined to the topic and the insults will stop.

Thanks for digging in on your stupidy. As for running away, you still haven't acknowledged how dumb your citing of Truimp's approval rating vis a vis whether or not it's declined. And that's not the only piece of nonsense you've offered here.

More irrelevant comments. Another data halfwit.,

I ran away? It's funny. The same people who accuse me of spending too much time on the internet, accuse me of cowardice but I'm not on it. Thanks for another laugh.

Thanks for providing some more entertainment. You're posting a snapshot of some online IQ test that you allegedly took. It figured that this is your idea of evidence. Thanks for the laughs.

Thanks for posting a comment that tells us more than we need to know about your IQ. Do I really have to explain to you why that is the case? I guess I do. We are all anonymous posters in this forum. So we are supposed to take each other's words for what we claim about our IQs? It is to laugh. I keep on wondering if your comments can get any dumber. And they keep on surprising me by repeatedly surpassing their previous lows.

Still no answer for the false claim at Microsoft is investing $500 billion because of Trump.

You really don't have a clue about how to use evidence do you? What do you offered here has nothing to do whether Trump's approval rating has declined or not. It simply shows where it is now. So clueless.

So Riclag wasn't cherry pickeing when he said that voters support Trump's negotiation plans? I included that data to give a fuller picture. That's the opposite of cherry picking.