somnio i do find it funny that you berate people here for being reductive of science and ignoring studies when you have a science educated person here telling you scientific fact and you ignore it because the implications go against your views

its almost as if ur attacking what you even are

and now you have to cope with the duhh doii racist line

you literally just said the warrior gene

nothing else

seems like retroactive goalpost moving to me

if you have to reaffirm what you said later because you didn't describe your position well enough first maybe ur just retarded

and inarticulate

again pretty broad generalisation

you're taking that stance just from what shawn said in the debate, and shawn had good reason to ignore what hunter said because his studies were already debunked in a debate with unorthodox theory

who is an actual psychologist btw

did you even read the study that shawn linked

cuz im sure a guy with a degree or whatever in endocrinology and sources to back up what he says has more validiy and accuracy than the coping pseudoscientist calling everyone buzzwords

maybe if you had an education in stats or psychology and listened to what either of them said then maybe you would be able to understand what he's even saying

yes the endocrinologist is wrong about hormone therapy

of course the person uneducated in hormone systems and chemical therapy is going to know more than the people with actual backgrounds in science

it's the exact same chemical

and that's what shawn said

he's not

i'll link you the actual chemical then

we can give you a mobile degree in endocrinology as well since you clearly can't understand anything outside of abstract and inapplicable marxist shit

ofc you did lol

shawn is the expert bud

u can't even explain how

he is if he has a degree in endocrinology

i also just want to point out right

you here are acknowledging the possibility for a scientist and person from a scientific background to be biased

and you're choosing to not believe shawn on that basis

and yet you will still ridicule us and him for doing the exact same thing by pointing out biases scientists and institutions have and choosing to criticise and write off what they say

it's just laughable

you don't seem to understand how you're trying to outsource expertise and knowledge while talking to people who have it firsthand

you're the exact same as hunter

just a vessel for whatever bullshit some other guys says

how do you know the guy is write if you don't understand endocrinology or psychology

you think you can just look at 1 study online and understand it all 😂

that's what you do all the time

you tell us we have to believe what scientists say and we should base our views on studies

why the contradiction now

ahahahaha

yeah tell us more

man with no scientific background speaking to people with actual scientific qualifications

please tell us more

as far as I am concerned you're just some reddit tier pseudoscientist who has to outsource your views on biology and etc to people who you acknowledge posses a bias while also acknowledging you do not have the scientific background or expertise to verify if they are even true

and yet you will still try and leverage the exact same against us

yeah those 2 terms aren't even remotely applicable to what i just said

you have no understanding of science and you just rely on other scientists who agree with you to tell you what to believe even though you can't verify it as true

and when ppl on the opposition say that it's false (ppl with qualifications at that) you just chimp out and regurgitate what your boys said

i have and it's pretty obvious you haven't

you came in swinging wildly about the warrior gene thinking it was some brainless alt right invention when really it isn't

and now you're trying to prove hormone blockers are perectly fine cuz ur internet """psychologist""" told you they are fine

incorrect

i'll go over this briefly because i've wasted enough time at you

but lets go back to the source that shawn used

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/chemical-castration

lets look at testicular atrophy (one of the symptoms listed)

Testicular atrophy induced by vitamin E deficiency in rats is irreversible. Various hormonal drugs and their antagonists such as estradiol benzoate (Miyamoto et al., 2000), fadrozole (Kawashita et al., 2000), anticancer agents or nucleic acid modulators such as cyclophosphamide (Watanabe et al., 2000), dopamine antagonist and antidepressant such as reserpine (Yamauchi et al., 2000), dopamine agonist, bromocriptine (Richardson et al., 1984), and antihypertensive drugs, methyldopa (Chapin and Williams, 1989), are examples of some of the drugs that cause testicular atrophy.

look at all of those fucking citations

look at them all

every single citation

ye

here's what he probably did

actually ill paste dms too

ye i went to dms cuz this nigga is spamming poetry

YOOOOOOOOO

LETS GOOOO

he went back on his immigration stance

ye

the guy used to be anti immigration for the same reason as us a few years ago

it was his words not ours

lol

whoever wins the 2020 election depends entirely on what platform trump runs on

if trump runs exclusively on socialism vs capitalism he will probably lose

cuz americans dont rlly care about that debate

it depends whether a crash happens or not too

markets are tanking but the chances are it will probably subside after a while

didn't obama get reelected after a crash?

or crisis rather

ye and he won reelection in 2012

it really depends how trump places his narrative

if there was a huge crash he could probably run on a protectionist platform and default back to the original america first stance

not really

trump didn't come into the race arguing for deregulation and free markets over socialism

it was immigration and nationalism which won him the election

most trump voters in 2016 were fairly left wing economically too iirc

can't remember where i got this from

It's hard to be a populist when you have no charisma and are making the same mistakes other socialists have made abroad

Corbyn ran in a similar way to bernie and got absolutely swamped by the tory party here in the UK

Looking at the caucus votes and etc it's pretty obvious the moderates are a majority over the bernie supporters

If trump moved more moderate on the economy he could probably beat bernie fairly easily

and that's assuming buttigieg or some other moderate doesn't steal the place as nominee

again it depends how trump runs

i can envision trump running in ways that capitalised on disenfranchised radicals

idk if it would be likely or not

since his corporate donors are still behind him

that is how trump won 2016

Trump won the republican candidate race on the merit that he just called ppl out for being shills

i can imagine if he still has his debate energy he could do the same thing