Refusing to discuss nuance is the problem

I love how these two posts came across my feed:

These two posts could not have lined up better:

I mean they’ve clearly seen it before, just asking if this version came from the same creator as the original. I wondered the same thing. Also, way to not answer the question in a very verbose way lol

DON’T MISS THE WWE SUMMERCRITICIZE!

Read that as United Atlantic Vultures and did a double-take. Not so far off though.

Lead exposure from shooting ranges has been studied and contributes to aggressive behaviors.

I’d call that a rattlin’ bog

Is there a link to the study being referenced? I couldn’t find any citations. Ocean acidification is worth talking about, but this article is sensational as heck. Constant use of dire language (“safe limit … exceeded”, “crucial threshold … breached”, “safe boundaries … crossed”, “sustainable levels … exceeded”, “close to the danger limit”) with no values explained or interpreted for the reader and only vague references to imminent catastrophe.

Maybe it’s talking about this new NOAA dashboard, it’s hard to tell, but I think this was a much better read:

https://research.noaa.gov/2024/08/21/new-ocean-acidification-maps-of-u-s-waters/

Wow, name super checks out

😟