sanpedropeddler @ sanpedropeddler @sh.itjust.works

Posts

1

Comments

359

Joined

2 yr. ago

I hadn't heard about any of this until now so I looked it up and I'm still pretty confused. Were people seriously harassing the dev just because of problems with the emulator? That's the only reasoning I can find and I don't understand how anyone can care that much about something so inconsequential.

I'm not aware of the supression of neurotransmission directly resulting in depression. I know alcohol does worsen depression, but I don't think that's a result of it being a depressant.

Here's an article that seems to agree with me.

The boundaries of what is considered ADHD are arbitrary. You don't have what is generally considered to be ADHD (at least according to your therapist), but that doesn't really mean anything. Brains are complicated and they don't always work how naming conventions want them to.

You are experiencing ADHD symptoms to a point where it is materially impacting your ability to live your life normally. That, at least to me, is a disorder.

Any method of managing ADHD symptoms will probably help you. Of course without a diagnosis you won't have access to ADHD medication, although its very possible that wouldn't be the solution you're looking for in the first place.

Here's an alternative title that's a little more positive: "I don't have diagnosed ADHD, science simply hasn't caught up to my brain yet."

In my experience at least, nicotine actually does alleviate anxiety. That is, until you become addicted to it and the anxiety you want to alleviate is caused by the substance itself.

I don't think a substance being a depressant necessarily says anything about its effect on actual depression, but otherwise I agree with your sentiment.

My public library is exactly like that. Its made up of two adjacent buildings, one mainly for children, and the other for adults. The only problem is that both are fairly quiet because very few people go there.

Nope she has no use for it anymore. She's gonna buy a whole fucking new one because Travis Kelce is too tall for the old one.

She also sold her jet which I'm guessing is related. She had a dessault falcon 900lx registered as N898TS but she very recently sold it to a company in Missouri.

I am going to assume you are wrong because your name is awful.

Us real Americans make our own cheese with melted plastic and yellow food coloring. We don't need that commie dairy shit.

Obviously there are going to be more total enslaved people now, it scales with the population. The problem with looking at it that way is that it doesn't actually tell you if the situation is improving. All it tells you is that there are way more people now. That's why you look at a percentage. That will tell you how bad the problem was, how much better its gotten, and how much better it needs to get.

I'm not trying to argue that everything is ok because a smaller percentage of people are enslaved now. A percentage is simply the more useful method of measuring how common slavery is and comparing it to different times.

If you aren't accounting for the change in population and you're just comparing the estimated number of slaves, then you are definitely correct. However, I think its probably better to measure what percentage of the population is made up of slaves.

What is your definition of slavery that would mean there is more slavery now than before the civil war?

The data I'm looking at says only 55% of people are even monotheistic. Where are you getting that 5 billion number from?

You can say that to any argument regardless of how accurate it is. To prove I have misrepresented your point, you have to show how I did that. Simply saying I did does not add anything of value to this conversation.

it is possible I misunderstood what you were saying, or you wrote something unintentionally misleading. If this is the case, please elaborate and explain where the misunderstanding occurred. Until then, I'm going to assume your accusation is simply a method of making yourself look correct without actually having to come up with an argument.

I think it pretty much has a lot to do with being an atheist, although I guess you consider those the ultimate antisemites as well for seeing the world outside of a fictional religious shell.

If you think Jews should not be allowed in positions of power, you are an antisemite. I literally could not give less of a shit what you believe in. I've been an atheist for most of my life, and I'm not an antisemite.

The peaceful religion I'm referring to is Judaism, the religion thats entire point is to spread good. Before you point out instances of Jews doing terrible things, I am aware that they are capable of wrongdoing like every other group of people.

think it's pretty clear not only what religion I'm referring to, but what branched off sects and eventually separate religions I'm referring to.

So are you referring to all abrahamic religions? If so, you should have maybe just said that instead of writing almost exclusively about the Israelites. Regardless, I still disagree with everything you said regardless of how many religions you drag into it.

Not only are you not the only person, you are the norm of this sad trend.

If all of the normal people think you're a lunatic, you may want to consider the idea that you simply are a lunatic. But you aren't mentally capable of comprehending the fact you're just an asshole, so you say every normal person is just a braindead sheep following a sad trend.

Imagine if this sort of attitude didn't just persist into the "modern" world, but involved offsprings of that very same cult holding power and influence in governments throughout the world. It would be a testament to a cultural unwillingness to overcome its own collective ego and overextended fictional narratives to recognize its flawed conception.

I would say its a testament to the fact that humanity isn't so stupid they will opress the followers of a peaceful religion for crimes their ancestors supposedly commited.

That's a lot of pseudo-intellectual nonsense to mask your obvious antisemitism. The way you snake around your point and avoid naming the religion you are condemning would almost be impressive were it not so awful.

I feel like I'm the only person who actually bothered to read that and didn't just mindlessly upvote it.

That's not really what most of them are theoretically about, but many of their followers treat it as such. I don't accredit that to religion though, I think some people are simply going to try to opress others regardless of whatever reasoning they use. There are bad people and good people in every population, and blaming the actions of those bad people on their larger group is (usually) to be avoided.

Because experts decided that was optimal to catch your attention. The fact you are here asking this question is proof enough that it worked.

South Park x Grand Theft Auto IV

I don't even know what that would be