ticapnews
Never graduate.
We'd just ruin Greenland. Better to leave it alone and just visit. No visa required for a stay of up to three months.
We already ruined Greenland. Google "Project Iceworm" sometime.
We'd just ruin Greenland. Better to leave it alone and just visit. No visa required for a stay of up to three months.
We already ruined Greenland. Google "Project Iceworm" sometime.
You got a 200 on the reading comprehension portion of the SAT English test, didn't you?
qualified me for membership in MENSA
Never took the SAT.
I'm from a big squarish flyover state that takes ACT.
But my ACT Composite score (pre-1989) qualified me for membership in MENSA.
Thanks for asking, and for your concern.
whoopty doo, my SAT scores would qualify me
the problem is when you're smart[er than the average dumb-***] but not smart enough to realize there are plenty of things you don't understand
compared to the scientists I work with I regularly feel like a dumb-***
And yet you apparently don't know what an inference is, even though you should've learned that in junior high.
I'm smart enough to know an inference involves reasoning.
And reasoning inherently involves the biases of the reasoner because they are human.
Two different people can reach different inferences on a situation based on their different patterns of reasoning with the available evidence.
There's a parked car missing a wheel. I may reason and infer "flat tire"; someone else may reason and infer "stolen". Until we know, we don't know who inferred correctly.
Never took the SAT.
I'm from a big squarish flyover state that takes ACT.
But my ACT Composite score (pre-1989) qualified me for membership in MENSA.
Thanks for asking, and for your concern.
Except they have shown the people stealing the wheel, talking about stealing the wheel, had people tweeting about stealing the wheel. Showed a pattern of behaviour that would help you infer they stole the wheel. At what point to you stop pretending the wheel is not off because of a flat tyre?
Believing that means believing Dana Rohrabacher.
And Assange's attorney.
And Assange.
There's a credibility trifecta.
Never took the SAT.
I'm from a big squarish flyover state that takes ACT.
But my ACT Composite score (pre-1989) qualified me for membership in MENSA.
Thanks for asking, and for your concern.
Except they have shown the people stealing the wheel, talking about stealing the wheel, had people tweeting about stealing the wheel. Showed a pattern of behaviour that would help you infer they stole the wheel. At what point to you stop pretending the wheel is not off because of a flat tyre?
Believing that means believing Dana Rohrabacher.
And Assange's attorney.
And Assange.
There's a credibility trifecta.
Rohrabacher previously told Los Angeles media—in September 2017–that he took part in a “confidential interaction” with the White House—in order to secure Assange a deal. The deal Rohrabacher described involved making Assange’s legal troubles go away in exchange for information that could exonerate Trump and the Trump campaign during the Russia probe.
The news outlet asked Rohrabacher if Assange was asking for a pardon as a part of a potential deal, but he would only say discussions were “confidential.”
Former federal prosecutor Richard Signorelli called the upshot here: “This is called corroboration of Assange’s attorney proffer of corrupt pardon promise by Trump.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Are you ****ing kidding me?! This is a joke, right? Does Grenell have even an iota of an intelligence background? <a href="https://t.co/BshN8BFB59">https://t.co/BshN8BFB59</a></p>— Daniel W. Drezner (@dandrezner) <a href="https://twitter.com/dandrezner/status/1230263855034572800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 19, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>