C’est raisonnable, si quelqu’un n’est pas exposé aux gens “x”…

Brake dust is pretty well-mitigated by EVs too, on account of regenerative breaking.

I assumed €$ eddies

I think a large and important difference is the ease of back-room manufacturer. Anyone with a boiler can can make some alcohol, but vapes are rather more complicated, no? Cigarettes and other straight up smoking products would still be around, though.

Alors pourquoi diriez-vous quelqu’un est x-phobe?

Well, no. Perhaps I’ve been misunderstood.

If no evidence whatsoever for a claim exists, then there is no reason to favor that claim. This is an effectively rare situation, and basically only applies to things someone has made up whole cloth just now.

Likewise, the existence of some evidence is not necessarily definitive “proof” of a claim, merely enough of a reason to consider it further (such as considering alternative explanations or how well said evidence matches what we might expect)

In this case, there is evidence that somebody named Jesus may have existed, and however ideal that evidence may or may not be, it is about the amount of evidence we would expect to find of any given figure from his time.

I will say that while evidence existing isn’t definitive proof, the total lack of evidence would be convincing (in the other direction). That said, evidence does exist in this case, so

Edit: clarity

Or, just, like,

“Pretty warm but I’m not complaining, you?”

You’re the one that brought units into it in your example. Maybe you’re the bad friend?

What, are you implying they somehow planned to all show up armed and uniformed? Ridiculous, the odds of such a thing.

I mean if you need to be using precise temperature units just to have a conversation… Maybe find less particular friends?

Cthulhu to A3

But they’ll take all of our incredibly desirable jobs!

It’s more than half though. It really is very heavily implied here that taxes are the main way you can tell an economy is doing well.

How the state taxes you:

Vs how the money is spent:

And part of their education score is “citizens holding degrees” which… That’s not education, that’s attainment rate.

Their whole methodology is not well outlined, and it’s unclear how they calculated anything. For example, they ranked Florida as having cheaper college than Wyoming, but on average college in Florida costs 3 times as much as in Wyoming?

It’s manslaughter. You kill someone with a machine, even if you weren’t trying to, it’s right up there next to murder.

You do know that you do it too, right? Even many words being spelled “correctly” and used “logically” have changed in meaningful ways. It might annoy when someone now says “I’m literally dying” after a joke, but once upon a time “incredible” meant “totally lacking credibility” and not “amazing”. Language changes. In French, you negate a verb by saying “not verb step”. Taken literally, it’s the same meaningless gibberish as “could of,” yet it’s good enough for l’Académie Française while “could of” is abhorrent? I get that it’s not how you’d like to communicate, and not how you’d like others to communicate with you, but it also isn’t inherently bad or undesirable, since clearly that is how many people communicate.

So communicate the way you prefer, and make it known that you’d prefer that. But also, don’t tell others they’re wrong for reasons that are, ultimately, just as arbitrary as theirs.

But that is what Randall’s talking about. People who often read and write with text speech and frequent misspellings and such actually score better at spelling and grammar tests. It’s not that they don’t know how to do better, it’s that they’re choosing not to. That’s how their audience communicates, so it’s how they do too.

Humorous comic relevant to this discussion.

Relevant xkcd. Sort of makes the opposite case, though.maybe you’re just not the one they want to be communicating with.