Every scientific article with “could” in it is bullshit.
I could have a twelve in cock in my pants.
Typed out the number but shortened the units.
No no, it’s an in cock, not an out cock. Like the difference between innie and outie belly buttons.
Dude has 12 vagoos in his pants. Still identifies as a dude.
Has trans gone too far??
When will he take a hint??"
Don’t shove numbers up your cock.
I have the square root of negative one in my butt as we speak
I don’t believe you, that sounds irrational!
Caleful with that, I hear tell those cause sinusoidals.
Not sure about that tbh. Seems only tangential related
There were plenty of articles claiming similar for her dogshit. Where’s the peer reviewed studies?
Her thing was supposed to work basically instantly, in a small box without a lab. This doesnt say anything about how that blood sample is actually tested.
Came in here for this.
Being able to do this at all is challenging, but building something the size of a bread machine that can be operated by anyone and maintains sterility on its own is something else.
You think news headlines are concerned with inconvenient shit like evidence?
I mean, they really should be. Imagine how much better everything were if news outlets could be hold responsible for spreading lies.
I recently watched an educational video for young students where they said something like “Journalists are usually sources you can trust because if a journalist lies they will lose credibility and their job,” and I don’t think we’re living in the same reality. Just because a particular news source doesn’t publish blatant falsehoods doesn’t mean they don’t lie by omission or use manipulative wording, and that’s not even getting into the ones that make money expressly off lying. I think maybe they don’t want to teach people to question state propaganda.
I “could” get out of bed and get to work early.
