You're contradicting things that are fairly self-evidently true and you're presenting exactly zero evidence/data yourself. Pipe down brainlet.
-
-
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
-
Please point to where the (pop-sci) article states that this list is exhaustive. I'll wait. In the mean time:https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224490409552214 …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
You didn't read this did you? There is no data on here. Sure they share the sample size but they don't talk about the methodology used. For a science article it's a really shitty one at that.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
It's called an abstract, dear. For someone who constantly accuses others of illiteracy, you don't seem very well read yourself.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm going to guess you haven't put this together that I am literally shit posting right? I used the first article I could fine on the subject and it even agreed with you lol. I guess you didn't read it though since you probably would have brought that up.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Says the guy that went for the obvious bait lol
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I would say it was effective since you were dismissive and condescending the whole time. Which is the type of responses I wanted. So I don't know how that would be pleb tier.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Git gud scrub. This is pathetic.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.