wow, never heard of it, sounds awesome and i definitely want to try it out, thanks.

ignorance-based fear.

lot of that in a geographically isolated country with poor education.

new information to who?

almost every hijacker was known to be Saudi and highly connected.

I feel like at least half of Lemmy is memes, and a good portion of those are about lemmy and the fediverse.

you’re right, they aren’t hashtagged.

I guess if you want to centralize them or hashtag fediverse memes specifically, you might want to start a community.

time to get reacqaaaaainted

Cool we were running out of new ones.

an unfertilized egg is just an egg.

like chicken eggs are unfertilized eggs because no sperm fertilized them.

If male ants are derived solely from the female gamete, the ovum, or egg, then male ants are eggs with legs, which is good, because it rhymes.

sperm is a male gamete, a different little thing than the female gamete, an egg.

as for the meme, they would all have grandfathers because the sperm was needed to make the queen who birthed the male ants, but none of them would have direct fathers, because the male ants are derived solely from the ovum of the queen.

“Within ants…males are produced from unfertilised eggs…”

So male ants are more like eggs with legs.

Filipinos have been running guerilla wars for a long time against a lot of invaders, I’d be surprised if they don’t have explosive boats and other measures on hand now, especially after so much antagonism by china.

China keeps getting real FAFO with Filipino ships.

thailand, Indonesia, okay, they’re not internationally aggressive countries and have a lot of economic deals with China.

but the Philippines?

china is banking on “my boats are so big”, but that doesn’t translate to combat readiness and if they continue sustained escalating conflicts or the Philippines stops putting up with their shit, I’m leaning Philippines the same way i was leaning Ukraine.

and guess who’ll be getting military aid from NATO?

seems right on brand.

he also wants millions of people to buy his terrible cars.

there are a lot of starving children in China being permanently affected by perpetual malnutrition and starvation.

https://www.wfp.org/countries/china

this article is about Japanese food waste innovation, btw, not Chinese.

proof?

or are you going to stick with the whole vague, baseless implications thing?

You keep making incorrect assumptions and drawing false conclusions.

Misleading and derailing the conversation won’t pan out.

I understand you’d rather not risk making any more embarrassing mistakes than you already have, but you can solve that by asking actual questions about the things you don’t understand instead of trying to “gotcha!” me with vagaries and baseless implications, which has backfired on you the last half dozen attempts.

it doesn’t matter that you don’t personally like the founder of MBFC and despite no evidence have sneaking suspicions about him and the popular palatability of his beliefs.

completely irrelevant to the point at hand.

We’re talking about the credibility of Media Bias Fact Check, which according to independent sources, is a highly reliable source with which to judge the credibility of news sources.

You misunderstood misinterpreted and maligned the site without evidence, were exposed as never having taken the trouble to actually read any of the site, and now you’re trying to find any windy path out of your many blunders.

as you’ll notice in my previous comments, I enjoy clarifying and explaining things.

If you have genuine questions that will help you understand a matter more clearly, I’ll be glad to lend a hand.

If you’re just trying to unproductively cast doubt and raise vitriol without evidence, your transparent runarounds aren’t going to accomplish anything.

Rather than personal opinions lacking supporting evidence, let’s look at the data we do have to analyze your baseless implication:

Live Science - HIGH
science daily - HIGH
scientific American - HIGH
nature - VERY HIGH
NASA - VERY HIGH

by your unfounded accusations, van Zandt highly values pro-science news sources.

look at all those extra steps you took to get back here and prove yourself wrong. Again.

“Scientific studies using its ratings note that ratings from Media Bias/Fact Check show high agreement with an independent fact checking dataset from 2017”

https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/2/9/pgad286/7258994?login=false

“When MBFC factualness ratings of ‘mostly factual’ or higher were compared to an independent fact checking dataset’s ‘verified’ and ‘suspicious’ news sources, the two datasets showed “almost perfect” inter-rater reliability”

I was also profoundly disappointed.

yup.

science is very obviously a political issue.

amazing.

that’s what you get for asking ill-defined questions without context.

please continue.

you can pretend i answered your straw man the way you wanted me to so that you can eventually, one day limp over to what appears to be coalescing into an inaccurate “gotcha!” based on false premises.

It is not a “biased” opinion, but it is certainly a political issue, to keep our topic consistent and hop ahead a few questions.

would you like to know why?

I’ll take another turn:

lgbtq+ prior having the right to exist in public is a political issue because lgbtq+ people have not achieved the unilateral, unchallenged right to exist in public everywhere yet, and overwhelmingly left-leaning political institutions and organizations are committed to extending that right to the lgbtq+ community.

Those left-leaning organizations are making political stances, engaging in political protest and rallies, passing (political, see where this is going?) legislation, to ensure that the conglomerate minorities of lgbtq+ have the undeniable right to exist in public.

these political actions are almost exclusively fought for and achieved by left-leaning organizations, resulting in the lgbtq+ movement being justifiably associated with and classified as left-leaning.

the dislocated straws you are grasping at for being too lazy to read a webpage before criticizing it are absurd.

“Do you think that the position that cisgender straight people have the right to exist in public is a biased opinion?”

strictly to exist?

no.

cis straight people have the right to exist in public.

any other brain busters?