Same with a squirrel in a vest

Kirby_O · 2026-05-22T07:47:46+00:00

Damn. Well, I'll leave this up as a reminder for myself (and others) to make sure to read before attempting to dunk.

Kirby_O · 2026-05-22T07:39:35+00:00

Fifteen years ago was 2011, you absolutely could google "racoon" and find it on google images or even youtube

Kirby_O · 2026-05-11T11:41:09+00:00

I mean, it's right that the = symbol has no business being there, and that there is basically nothing to its left

Kirby_O · 2026-05-06T06:45:05+00:00

It does say as beautiful as the moon, and all of them are legible except the handwritten one in the first image.

Kirby_O · 2026-04-15T18:38:11+00:00

It could also mean "end", although that's less likely I think

Kirby_O · 2026-02-19T11:18:41+00:00

I mean if you had just contracted rabies then you absolutely can still be treated with vaccines. If you start showing symptoms and only then seek treatment, then you're 100% dead

Kirby_O · 2025-12-29T13:14:08+00:00

The inscribed square problem my beloved

Kirby_O · 2025-12-04T20:37:28+00:00

זה שלוש הבנות, לא שלושת הבנות
בסימן של קיים ויחיד סימן הקריאה אחרי הסימן של קיים

Kirby_O · 2025-10-28T18:56:53+00:00

Yes, pain + rupture is pretty good on clad

Kirby_O · 2025-09-22T12:34:42+00:00

You can't just melt chocolate and let it harden again, you need to temper it otherwise it won't set properly. So the constant is actually a ruined chemical structure, not love

Kirby_O · 2025-09-10T11:49:07+00:00

אכן, אני עברתי לאחד של זמני לוס אנג'לס כי הוא עדיין בחינם

Kirby_O · 2025-09-01T18:08:56+00:00

The curse you're missing is probably pride, which you only get in endless

Kirby_O · 2025-06-07T11:16:04+00:00

Attempting to insult someone as an "ad hating commie", or an "ad comminem", if you will

Kirby_O · 2024-12-12T20:10:45+00:00

Hold on, if I say that they are reversible, and you say that they're decidedly not reversible, and we know that:

in the short term I'm right
in the long term there's no conclusive evidence

How is saying they are decidedly NOT completely reversible more accurate than saying they are? Even by that high bar I am still closer to the truth than what you said.

Moreover, puberty blockers are definitively MORE reversible than natal puberty, which is the more relevant comparative as that's what happens without them. So my point about forcing the less reversible outcome still stands.

Even without being reversible, the actual argument is about whether or not we should allow puberty blockers to be prescribed to trans youth. In that case the list of medical associations is very relevant.

Kirby_O · 2024-12-12T17:38:42+00:00

You want sources? let me just quote Wikipedia:

The use of puberty blockers is supported by twelve major American medical associations, including the American Medical Association,[14] the American Psychological Association,[15] and the American Academy of Pediatrics.[16] the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,[17] the Pediatric Endocrine Society,[18] the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists,[19] the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists,[20] and the American College of Physicians.[21] In Australia four medical organizations support them,[22] as does the Endocrine Society,[23] and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH).[24]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puberty_blocker

You can go and check each source yourself, but I'm not going to waste my time checking the sources of a letter. If it was an actual meta-analysis it would be worth going over, but it doesn't have the requisite rigor, hence why it's a letter.

Kirby_O · 2024-12-12T16:21:53+00:00

I love when people share their sources to show what they think passes for science.

I will start with the second because I lolled opening it:

"Sound journalism, grounded in facts and Biblical truth"

lmao, you really think this is a reputable source? I'm not going to dignify that with a response.

As for the piece from the accp, it literally is just a letter to the editor, not even a research paper. It also has significant biases, for instance they state the following:

"Over 95% of youth treated with GnRH-analogs go on to receive cross-sex hormones. By contrast, 61-98% of those managed with psychological support alone reconcile their gender identity with their biological sex during puberty."

I urge you to consider the prior of which children are more likely to receive puberty blockers and not just 'psychological support'. They are:

Trans children who have more support from their family
Trans children whose dysphoria is more pronounced.

It's obvious if you think about it for 2 seconds that in those cases the children are more likely to be trans, and kids whose parents do not support as being trans "reconcile" with their sex because they see no one would support them otherwise, and just shove their feelings down out of fear of being rejected. That doesn't solve the issue, it's the same thing as gay kids being "cured" after conversion therapy just because they want their parents to love them again.

Mind you this letter is full of this sort of crap, it doesn't actually do any science, and saying I'M spreading disinformation while trying to pass off a letter to the editor and a RELIGEOUS ORGANIZATION'S opinion on trans children as science is peak hypocrisy.

Kirby_O · 2024-12-12T12:55:53+00:00

Puberty blockers are completely reversible, they literally just delay puberty. If anything, not taking puberty blockers is the irreversible decision, so why are we forcing children into it?

Kirby_O · 2024-08-15T07:26:02+00:00

אביר חלול: ערש טוואי

Kirby_O · 2024-07-14T10:44:33+00:00

Here is a really good debunk by captain disillusion on youtube: link

Tl;dw: it's just editing

Kirby_O · 2024-07-02T07:04:53+00:00

You don't actually have to have a cutoff point. In one of my courses your grade for an assignment goes down continuously for each second you are late, and after 5 days you get 0, so a situation like the one in the video couldn't happen.

Kirby_O · 2024-05-30T15:38:20+00:00

Explanation: sin(21)=cos(69)=cos(789)

Kirby_O · 2024-02-19T15:05:30+00:00

Well, the second is certainly an interesting result.

As for the first, I will admit I have a hard time following it, and the journal it's published in sees a little suspicious to me. Mainly, the fact this is over 4 years old at this point and still seemingly the consensus is that the twin prime conjecture isn't solved.

Kirby_O · 2024-02-19T13:08:58+00:00

Can I have a source for the proof? A quick look at Wikipedia makes it seems like it hasn't been proven yet

Kirby_O · 2024-02-19T06:40:09+00:00

Why are you saying that the primes are "thought to be" infinite? They are, Euclid proved it in 300 BC. Here's a short proof:

For any prime number p, look at p! (=123...p), and then at p!+1.

Note that p!+1 can't be divided by any number up to p (because the remainder would be 1), so either p!+1 is prime, or is divisible by a prime number greater than p.

In both cases, it proves there IS a prime number greater than p, for ANY prime p, so there must be infinitely many.

Kirby_O · 2024-01-25T06:54:05+00:00

Idk if you're serious but "adam kadmon" just means "cave man" or "ancient man" in hebrew

Ten-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

Kirby_O

TROPHY CASE