Yes, the problem is sources, and then you are here posting opinion hit-pieces from people who have proven themselves to be absolute grifters, while you are denying irrefutable facts from experienced investigative journalists or even the prevailing evidence from decades of scientific research, by thousands of independent scientists, across many different disciplines, from all over the globe.

When journalists are given classified information from a whistleblower, they don't trust
the whistleblower, they will verify as much of that information as possible, against other sources. I always get the impression that you have no idea how that works.
I know the person saying that. He is smart enough to understand this, which means
he has some reason to spread doubt on processes like this.

Your account get reported like every 2nd day by yet another and another member. A lot of people demand to kick you out. And by the way I absolutely would do that if you were not a paid member. It's nothing personal, I only try to balance site's budget vs what users want. So the best thing I can do without deleting your account is to put a warning on it. They still report you for deletion by the way, just slightly less.

As for other accounts that you claim have spam or AI - they don't get reported. Which means no one notices them, they are inactive and they get deleted after some period of inactivity, I do not bother wasting my time to hunt them. Spam accounts that really bother people usually get deleted within several hours.

Just curious, have you been completely transparent with the members that visit and post on your page? Have you shared with your fans that you are merely a vision and creation of a person behind the keyboard? As long as you’re not being deceptive, there’s no harm, no foul, right? I admit, I have posted that in most cases, I am not able to discern what is AI however in my opinion, your content does appear to be manufactured.

It is ironic that some residents of Piddington, England, are asking Donald Trump for help, because they feel their government is imposing a major decision on their community without their consent. They seem to see him as a champion of local voices, but many Americans have felt the same frustration under Trump's policies.

In Dilley, Texas, residents faced the reality of a large federal immigration detention facility in their community and many were angry that such a major decision was made with little say from local people. In California, communities and local officials also pushed back against immigration detention expansions, arguing that Washington was forcing federal policies onto their neighborhoods while ignoring their concerns.

And the pattern goes beyond immigration. Across the United States, communities have pushed back against the rapid expansion of AI data centers, complaining about noise, pollution concerns, and higher utility bills. Many residents feel that powerful corporations and governments are making decisions first and asking communities to accept the consequences afterward.

So the irony is hard to miss: people who feel ignored by their own government are appealing to a leader whose own country has citizens making the same complaint, that their voices were not heard before major decisions affecting their lives were made.

Correlation is not causation!

The study appears to have been performed using a legitimate scientific method and is not simply an example of cherry-picking an unusual result. The researchers used a large dataset and an established statistical approach, so the finding is worth taking seriously as a possible observation.

However, there are still important questions before accepting it as a confirmed scientific conclusion. A single study, even a large one, can produce a result that does not appear in later research. A repeat of the analysis using an independent dataset would be needed to see whether the same correlation appears again. Replication is especially important for surprising findings.

Also, a correlation does not by itself prove the cause. Even if the association between earlier sexual initiation and shorter lifespan is confirmed, it does not mean that earlier sexual activity itself causes reduced longevity. The relationship could be explained by other factors that influence both.

Possible explanations include:
• Parenting style and upbringing: people raised with more caution, planning, and risk awareness may both delay sexual activity and make healthier long-term choices.
• Socioeconomic factors: childhood poverty, education level, and access to resources may influence both age of sexual initiation and later health.
• Family stability: supportive family environments may affect both personal choices and lifelong health outcomes.
• Personality traits: characteristics such as impulsivity, risk-taking, or self-control may influence both sexual timing and health behaviors.
• Puberty and biological development: earlier physical maturation may affect both sexual timing and later biological processes.
• Stress and childhood experiences: early adversity may influence both life choices and long-term health.
• Other genetic influences: the genetic factors associated with sexual timing may also affect personality, behavior, or health through unrelated pathways.

Therefore, the current study can reasonably be viewed as evidence of an interesting association, but more research is needed to determine whether the relationship is causal and what mechanism might explain it.

Verdict: Misleading / not established as written.

The headline combines a confirmed event (a Houston man was killed in an ICE-involved shooting) with an unproven allegation (that he had methamphetamine in his vehicle).
The evidence does not show that the FBI has confirmed meth was found in the car.

What is confirmed
The man was Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a 52-year-old Houston construction worker and father. He was fatally shot by an ICE agent during an enforcement operation on July 7, 2026.
Federal officials said the shooting occurred after agents attempted to stop his van and alleged he used the vehicle in a threatening way. Witnesses in the van dispute that account and say the shooting was unprovoked.
Authorities have acknowledged that Salgado Araujo was not the original target of the ICE operation; DHS said he resembled the person agents were looking for.

What about the “meth in his car” claim?
The FBI obtained a search warrant based on agents’ belief that they saw “crystal-like substances” in the van that could be narcotics.
That is not the same as confirming meth was found. Reports indicate testing had not established that the substance was methamphetamine.
Salgado Araujo’s family attorney said the material was salt, reportedly used by workers as part of a homemade electrolyte mixture, not meth. Local prosecutors also said the drug claim had not been verified.

Bottom line
The statement “FBI says he had meth in his car” overstates what investigators had publicly established. A more accurate version would be:
“The FBI said agents believed they saw possible narcotics in the van and sought testing, but authorities had not publicly confirmed that the substance was methamphetamine.”

So the headline appears to turn an investigative allegation into a confirmed fact, which is not supported by the available reporting.

As soon as humans developed language, they started dying from stupid dares, maybe even before. Some sorry excuse for a caveman probably died, after his mate grunted some sound of embarrassment when he was being careful. That's evolution at work.

It's even observed behavior in great apes, that resemble showing off, competing, or taking risks in front of others, but there is no clear evidence that apes "dare" each other in the human sense. A dare requires understanding a social challenge like "I bet you won't do it" or "Prove you're brave," which depends on fairly sophisticated language and social norms.

I recognized the name, so I read a bit about him. Seems like he struggled a lot to reconcile Christian scripture with scientific evidence for an old Earth and biological evolution.

Are you talking about that his home filled with specimens, animal as well as mineral, live as well as dead? And that he claimed that he wanted to eat at least one individual of all animal species? A strange intention indeed. Sounds a little like some traditional Chinese medicinal practices. The underlying idea is often that an animal's characteristics can be transferred to the person consuming a particular body part. Examples include:
- Tiger bones for strength.
- Deer antlers for vitality and virility.
- Bear bile for liver or gallbladder ailments.
- Rhino horn (historically) for reducing fever, despite the horn being composed primarily of keratin, like human fingernails.

For most of human history, people had no knowledge of cells, proteins, DNA, hormones,
or biochemistry. Instead, they relied on observation, analogy, and experience. It seemed intuitive that:
- A strong animal might literally contain "strength."
- A fertile animal might confer fertility.
- A fierce predator might impart courage or aggression.
- An organ might heal the corresponding organ in humans.
This way of thinking appears independently in many cultures because it fits how humans naturally reason about the world. It's what people would call 'common sense', until it's replaced by actual knowledge and understanding.

Where do you think that I think that slavery started?
The 'occupation' of slave might be older than the 'occupation' of prostitute.
I don't think that where it started is an argument for anything.
I just see the end as a huge step in the development of humanity.
The ones who gain from distorting the truth, are very likely disagreeing with me.

Oh, not a black woman this time, but a 'communist'.
Like there are no completely useless idiots wearing MAGA hats.

No evidence at all that this person genuinely identifies as a communist.
When you are saying "I love communism", when you are stealing, you have NOT understood Marx's ideology. However, I'm sure she is on the left or anarchist side of politics somewhere. Since the term has been used to describe very different, and even very contradictory ideas, it's easy to use or misuse the label for almost anything.

Understand that they are not arguing that a certain principle in communist theory encourages or requires such actions. They are calling someone a communist, then claim that communism was the cause for the action, and then call communism a flawed ideology. That's circular reasoning. It's either incredibly lazy arguing or intentionally deceptive. That's however the low standard of reasoning in all the articles you are posting.

As an analogy, suppose someone stole food from a government office and posted:
"I love capitalism."
You wouldn't immediately conclude they were a committed capitalist, had studied Adam Smith, or that capitalism caused the theft. It could be sarcasm, trolling, a joke, or a genuine belief. You'd want more evidence before drawing conclusions about their political identity.

By the way, if you are working for DoorDash, you are going hungry anyway.

Communism means centralized government ownership.
Socialism means publicly controlled and publicly owned.
Capitalism means owned by a small minority of wealthy people.

Ownership means power. Why do you want to give all the power away to wealthy people?

The last remaining systems that are any good in your country are publicly funded.
Almost everything that has been privatized has turned to shit for the users and a
tool to extract money from the pockets of the users into the pockets of the owners.

"before it gets out of control." OMG you crazy person, there is hardly any communism
or socialism left. Almost everything has been capitalized.
You are lucky that you don't have to pay some company for the air you are breathing YET.

Have you considered how capitalism could get out of control?
Tell me what that would look like. Show me that you have the mental exploration power.

Integration does involve change, but change is not the same as cultural loss. Throughout history, immigrant communities have often preserved their language, traditions, food, religion, and values while also participating fully in the societies they joined. Integration is about learning to function within a shared civic framework, not erasing one's identity.
In many countries, cultures have evolved and become richer through the exchange
of ideas, customs, and traditions. The real challenge is balancing social cohesion with cultural diversity, not choosing one at the expense of the other.

One passage is doing more than talking about "culture", it is primarily arguing for representation, familiarity, and a sense of belonging. Notice the examples the author gives:
- Reading books by Black authors.
- Watching films made by or about Black people.
- Attending a historically Black church.
- Making Blackness feel like "home" rather than something encountered once a year.

Their culture from Africa was already taken from them, by the slave owners. What is considered black culture, has only developed during that period and what came after. The black church is Christian, a religion that was forced upon them. Gospel music comes from slaves who were singing while doing backbreaking work, to make it more bearable. Their food traditions ("soul food") comes from the skill of making animal feed edible.

The article says: "Please, for the love of all things holy, don’t let your child’s exposure to Black culture begin and end with Black History Month.". I agree with that. They should be represented every day of the year.
Meanwhile, your administration is trying to erase not just Black History Month, but every book by a black author or with a black character in it. You are trying to erase their history in your country. Your administration is kicking out black people from all leadership positions and trying to make it impossible for them to elect black representation.
You want to completely erase their own identity, while you simultaneously expect them to accept that they don't have the same value as you. You want them to accept that American history is WHITE history. That's what you mean with "the loss of their culture".

I beg to differ with that. Why should a company waste it's time investing in you with raises and promotions if they know you are going to leave in 3 years? it would be a bad investment for them to do so.That is why a contract would be a good thing. For the company to invest in you, you have to invest in the company with your time. Want raises and promotions ,sign a contract that you will give them 15 years service and etc. I can't blame companies for not doing the same any more. people quit and change jobs at the drop of a hat nowadays. and when they get old, they won't have shit for retirement and will be looking for the government to bail them out

Well I agree with him on this issue, but at the same time why are adults playing "games" anyway? the world has really sunk to a new low when adults are playing the part of a cartoon. Put that energy into something good,mow the lawn, wash the car,learn new things, playing a digital video game is mind numbing,and sadly to many peoples minds are numb already