Really? Huh.

Yeah, that kinda tracks. Thanks!

I think it's supposed to imply none of your business...

Alright, got it. Thanks for the explanation! I'm actually running ublue on two computers right now (bazzite on my desktop, beyond on my laptop, although I'm rebasing soon), so I'm not like a total noob to all this, and I have read the docs. I was just having trouble parsing an idiom.

Okay. Don't read any further. Go ahead and walk away. It's not like you were paying attention to anything I said anyway.

You're wrong. I'm not lying. I'm not even being disingenuous. But, hey, fuck you decided I was, and u guess that's fucking it.

Jesus. No matter what side of the argument, it's assholes like you ruining the world for the rest of us. Have a nice life.

Eta: sorry, I meant to say have a nice life, you fucking coward.

Seriously? I already directly addressed this in a reply to you.

This is at best, an outright lie. You want people to vote for the "lesser evil", that is an endorsement of Biden and any other Democrat.

It isn't an endorsement. How is calling something "evil" an endorsement? If I said "I hate beer cheese and pimento cheese, but if I have to eat one, I'll take beer cheese" an endorsement of beer cheese? As far as I can see, I just said I hated them both.

You are trying to play a game where you admonish people to vote for Biden but get to dodge the argument about whether he's worth voting for.

No, I'm not, and the fact that you think I am completely baffles me. All I said was *the other guy is worse." That's the position I took. That does not require providing evidence of Biden's virtues, because that position has nothing to do with his virtues.

How am I explaining this wrong? How am I fucking up my point this badly? Am I writing in English?

You endorse Biden

Again, no. Calling someone slightly less horrible than former president Cheeto isn't an endorsement in the same way coming out of a movie theater and saying "well, at least it wasn't Bloodfeast 2" isn't a positive review.

but will not tackle his inadequacies because they're inconvenient, so you act snide about it instead of addressing them.

Because my statement has nothing whatsoever to do with his inadequacies. I'm not being snide, I'm just fucking confused as to why you think I like the guy.

Rattle off all the shit you want about how horrible he his. I DO NOT CARE. HE'S NOT AS BAD AS THE OTHER GUY.

That's not me being snide or sarcastic. That's me shouting the same fucking thing I've been saying for days now. I'm not endorsing him, I'm anti-endorsing Trump. I didn't vote for Biden, I voted against Trump.

Congrats. I've shifted from "confused and exasperated" to "fucking pissed off." If that was your goal this whole time, well trolled.

• This is lying

It is not. It is, at worst, being disingenuous. I'm not splitting hairs here. Lying is making false statements with the intent to deceive. Even if I was avoiding your question instead of trying my goddamndest to answer it, it would still not be lying.

Fuck, it wouldn't even be dishonest, just shitty rhetorical practice and an asshole move.

I didn't vote in the 2020 election and I won't be voting in any other elections because I'm done voting for Democrats pretending to give a shit about anyone other than themselves.

Jesus fucking Christ fine! If that's what your conscience demands, then fucking do that! Just get off my dick, and learn what the words "liar" and "endorse" mean.

Fuck's sake.

I mean, you're not wrong. I just can't bring myself to use a chromium based browser unless I have no other choice. So here I am on Librewolf...

Well... kind of. The difference is that the official Gnome text editor's actual name is Text Editor. It's not a case of the desktop calling, for instance, Pluma or Xed "Text Editor". The Gnome music app is literally called " Music."

So... is it Snap ~~infected~~ err… Snap based, like Ubuntu? Because otherwise it looks kinda neat.

How…

Scientists don't have opposing views on thats specific thing*. It's an example used right up there with thinking the earth is flat.

One completely discredited study linked the combined MMR vaccine to a new, made up gastrointestinal disorder. That disorder was supposedly linked to autism. The guy who ran the study had financial ties to a company that manufactured a measles vaccine separate from MMR. He had a financial motive. He paid children for blood samples at his kid's party and bragged about it. He's a monster responsible for every death caused by the measles since his evil, fake, completely made up study came out.

You want to know what makes a person seem ignorant? Being anti-vax or buying into the abject nonsense that ASD is caused by vaccines.

I mostly assumed you were being pedantic when you tried to make out that I thought science was epistemological rather than methodological when I had mentioned science as a methodology in my previous post. This lead me to three possibilities (well, likely possibilityies, anyway):

1. You didn't really read what I wrote
2. You're dumb
3. You're being pedantic to belittle people.

Now, you're pretty clearly not dumb, so I just eliminated 2. That left me with 1 and 3 as the most likely. I played the odds that someone who was clever couldn't possibly have missed the point of the initial comment so many times, so I went with 3.

What I didn't count on was possibility 4: you've had to deal with so many morons who don't know what "science" means that your default assumption is that people mean something dumb when they say "I trust science."

Which is my bad, really. I should have asked. I apologize.

That hurt my brain, darn you.

That is an impossible standard for folks to live by. I can't do that, and neither can you.

When I say I "trust in science" I'm talking about the process and the method. Which means I trust the results when people follow that process. i also trust that the answers may change if there's new information, because that's part of the process.

I don't have the equipment to perform all those experiments. Even if I did, I wouldn't trust the results because I don't have the education to set up, run, and interpret an experiment more complicated than improving my chili recipe.

So, in much the same way that I trust a mechanic to fix my transmission and a.plumber to fix my pipes, I trust a scientist to follow the scientific method.

That's what "trusting science" means.