There’s a few things going on here.

I think this particular polar bear is “rare” simply because it happens to have come ashore in Iceland, which doesn’t often happen. It’s species is merely “threatened”.

Also, this isn’t wanton wholesale slaughter. This particular animal was a threat to humans and after considering the options euthanisation was determined to be the least bad. As humans, we’ve observed this practice literally since the dawn of time. We regularly euthanise sharks which have attacked humans, we regularly cull “pests” including large cute ones like Kangaroos, and smaller cute ones like foxes and rabbits.

Encroachment of humans on the habitat’s of threatened species is certainly a problem, and one which needs to be carefully managed, but this is not that.

That sounds kinda plausible.

Counting in regional areas will be concluded before counting in city polling places.

No, all the data says I’m right. We have all the best people working on it. They’re saying it’s all the best numbers.

This is just the same vibe-based reasoning but with sprinkles.

Firstly, was Biden unseated because of uncommitted? Or was he unseated because Democrat donors saw his poor performance during the debate and withdrew their support? Just because uncommitted exists, does not mean that they were effective.

Secondly, surely there’s a non-zero number of people who support arming Israel. I freely admit that I haven’t been following this conflict, but it doesn’t seem much of an assumption to say that some votes would be lost if Kamala withdrew support for Israel. Would she lose more votes than she would gain? That certainly seems like a possibility.

Thirdly, withholding your vote, and convincing others to withhold theirs, is precisely what Russian and Chinese bot-farms want you to do. Well done.

I don’t really understand what this is actually saying?

Surely, if this were saying “covid started in italy” or “covid was around in 2019” that would rate more song and dance than a single obscure research paper?

I think you may have misunderstood.

If you’re a 22yo “influencer” and your target market is people who follow 22yo influencers then it will be difficult to generate engagement when you’re 27.

That doesn’t seem that controversial to me, and I don’t see how octogenarians getting laid at the supermarket is relevant?

Oh man. What a shit show honestly.

I’m a strong supporter of paying for things but this is not the way.

IDK about “legally obligated”, but certainly professionally and ethically obligated.

If someone commits a heinous crime, and you want them to rot in jail for 100 years, then you need them to have the strongest possible defence. Otherwise, they might be able to appeal their conviction, or the family of the accused may feel vindictive.

Basically, if you want justice you need the best possible defence.

That’s just semantics.

Making a dark joke about a terrorist attack isn’t very nice.

Israel sent explosive pagers to hesbollah.