Soybean Oil Might Inflict Neurological Changes To The Brain

[specsaregood]

Maybe a time out will help you realize the errors of your ways.

From YOUR signature.



This, the insults, and ridicule is enough for me to say - your toxicity is not welcome here.

See ya!

Who are you again? Maybe you should take another indefinite leave, we were getting along fine without you for years.

[Swordsmyth]

Who are you again? Maybe you should take another indefinite leave, we were getting along fine without you for years.

Schiff got banned for disagreeing with Angela's ban..........................


Is that going to happen to others?

[r3volution 3.0]

I wish we could figure out what destroys the logic cells in the people who believe and post these articles. I understand that Created makes his living doing that, what I don't understand is how so many people can be scientifically retarded enough to buy into it.

It's like a religion. They don't need facts - they have faith.

Well, my dearly and recently departed friend, the cause (other than the obvious, which shall go unnamed in the interest of me not joining you) is over-stimulation. These days, anybody can go on youtube and find anything to support any position of any kind. How are they to know what to believe? It's chaos. Throw in some skepticism of the "establishment," which is fundamentally justified, but still often leads to unfortunate effects (bathwater --> baby), and there you have it. Note that I have no opinion or knowledge about any of this, and also don't really care. I expect to eventually stroke out from too much booze, beef, and tobacco, like a respectable gentleman.

[nikcers]

Well, my dearly and recently departed friend, the cause (other than the obvious, which shall go unnamed in the interest of me not joining you) is over-stimulation. These days, anybody can go on youtube and find anything to support any position of any kind. How are they to know what to believe? It's chaos. Throw in some skepticism of the "establishment," which is fundamentally justified, but still often leads to unfortunate effects (bathwater --> baby), and there you have it. Note that I have no opinion or knowledge about any of this, and also don't really care. I expect to eventually stroke out from too much booze, beef, and tobacco, like a respectable gentleman.

It's not like that anymore youtube demonetizes and removes content that isn't progressive.

[r3volution 3.0]

It's not like that anymore youtube demonetizes and removes content that isn't progressive.

Youtube is overflowing with nonsense ("progressive" or otherwise).

And it's not just youtube.

The internet in general is very much a double edged sword.

One has access, often for free, to incredible knowledge, to the point that formal education is increasingly pointless.

But one also has access to abject $#@!, which, if one isn't able to recognize it as $#@!, causes problems.

I guess it's Darwinian.

[pcosmar]

I expect to eventually stroke out from too much booze, beef, and tobacco, like a respectable gentleman.

I wish..

Hey I just read some Worthless Pseudoscience that claim Cannabis causes Heart Problems.

I won't bother you with a link. I didn't save it..

Saw another a while back about Pot use causing Depression.. (I consider it anti-depressant,, and use it to treat depression I have had since Childhood,)

My heart is likely,, Family habit.

I Honestly do not even worry about it,, and sometime wonder what is taking so long.

[Danke]

Who are you again? Maybe you should take another indefinite leave, we were getting along fine without you for years.

[nikcers]

Youtube is overflowing with nonsense ("progressive" or otherwise).

And it's not just youtube. The internet in general is very much a double edged sword.

One has access, often for free, to incredible knowledge.

But one also has access to abject $#@!, which, if one isn't able to recognize it as $#@!, causes problems.

I guess it's Darwinian.

They got rid of a lot of stuff. They demonitize and remove content even if they don't violate the rules. It was a response to Trump winning the election.

[r3volution 3.0]

They got rid of a lot of stuff. They demonitize and remove content even if they don't violate the rules. It was a response to Trump winning the election.

Did you acquire that opinion from a youtube video?

[nikcers]

Did you acquire that opinion from a youtube video?

Even Ron Paul was demonetized.

[r3volution 3.0]

Even Ron Paul was demonetized.

It's part of the branding of certain media venues to pretend to be oppressed.

[nikcers]

It's part of the branding of certain media venues to pretend to be oppressed.

They even rip people off on videos with their algorithms. They automatically demonetize videos that get a lot of views and you have to submit for a manual review that takes days to get approval. People are losing out on thousands of dollars of revenue.

[r3volution 3.0]

They even rip people off on videos with their algorithms. They automatically demonetize videos that gets a lot of views and you have to submit for a manual review that takes days to get approval. People are losing out on thousands of dollars of revenue.

You have this view because one the youtube channels you watch is saying this, right?

[nikcers]

You have this view because one the youtube channels you watch is saying this, right?

So if a youtube channel says something its not true?

[r3volution 3.0]

So if a youtube channel says something its not true?

If a youtube channel says something, you can almost certainly find 100 which say other, contradictory things.

I would suggest reading, and not news, for the purpose of forming one's worldview.

But, hey, I'm just some guy on the internet, so feel free to ignore me (and I'm sure you will).

[nikcers]

If a youtube channel says something, you can almost certainly find 100 which say other, contradictory things.

I would suggest reading, and not news, for the purpose of forming one's worldview.

But, hey, I'm just some guy on the internet, so feel free to ignore me (and I'm sure you will).

Just because there is content from different opinions doesn't mean that its not a good source for information. Its definitely beginning to be censored ever since Clinton lost in 2016. The leftists attacked google for having conspiracy content and anything that wasn't mainstream got attacked by advertisers that are ran by progressives that supported Clinton. Social media is now mainstream media and there is no real alternatives now.

[r3volution 3.0]

Just because there is content from different opinions doesn't mean that its not a good source for information.

1. Read books (yes, those antiques made from trees) to acquire a world view, a set of principles for interpreting facts.

2. Read various news sources for the purpose of acquiring facts (ignoring the opinions contained in those sources).

3. Apply principles from #1 to facts from #2.

--> understanding

This would contrast with listening to some person on youtube (likely dumb or ill-intentioned, or both) and simply accepting what he says.

Its definitely beginning to be censored ever since Clinton lost in 2016. The leftists attacked google for having conspiracy content and anything that wasn't mainstream got attacked by advertisers that are ran by progressives that supported Clinton. Social media is now mainstream media and there is no real alternatives now.

There's still a smorgasbord of Trump-porn content available at your fingertips on youtube.

What you're saying is a PR narrative put forth by one of those innumerable pro-Trump channels, playing the victim.

[nikcers]

1. Read books (yes, those antiques made from trees) to acquire a world view, a set of principles for interpreting facts.

2. Read various news sources for the purpose of acquiring facts (ignoring the opinions contained in those sources).

3. Apply principles from #1 to facts from #2.

--> understanding

This would contrast with listening to some person on youtube (likely dumb or ill-intentioned, or both) and simply accepting what he says.



There's still a smorgasbord of Trump-porn content available at your fingertips on youtube.

What you're saying is a PR narrative put forth by one of those innumerable pro-Trump channels, playing the victim.

Based on your logic i shouldn't trust books because sometimes they are written by dumb or ill intended people. I should just ignore the fact that the modern day library of Alexandria is burning. I should just be happy for delumination because some people's opinions are unauthentic or ill intentioned. I should just trust the paper books because those couldn't possibly be censored only electronic books can be censored.

[TheTexan]

"might"

Right there in the title. Little green men from Mars might be shooting cancer rays into us, but probably are not.

I dunno, I've seen strong evidence on this forum of negative neurological changes to the brain. If it's not soybean oil then it's definitely something else.

[r3volution 3.0]

Based on your logic i shouldn't trust books because sometimes they are written by dumb or ill intended people.

That's a reasonable point, but physical (non-fiction) books tend to not get published if the author is a complete moron.

The exception being people like Trump, who is a moron, but is also famous, and also doesn't write his own (atrocious) books.

I should just ignore the fact that the modern day library of Alexandria is burning. I should just be happy for dellumination because some people's opinions are unauthentic or ill intentioned. I should just trust the paper books because those couldn't possibly be censored only electronic books can be censored.

Library of Alexandria burning? LOL

More like arsonists sitting out on the corner talking about cheerios.

[nikcers]

That's a reasonable point, but physical (non-fiction) books tend to not get published if the author is a complete moron.

The exception being people like Trump, who is a moron, but is also famous, and also doesn't write his own (atrocious) books.



Library of Alexandria burning? LOL

More like arsonists sitting out on the corner talking about cheerios.

The Democratic frontrunner wants to go further and repeal section 230. If he wins he will take it further.

[r3volution 3.0]

The Democratic frontrunner wants to go further and repeal section 230. If he wins he will take it further.

...of the Communications Decency Act, you mean?

[nikcers]

...of the Communications Decency Act, you mean?

They are going to burn it all down.

[nikcers]

...of the Communications Decency Act, you mean?

If they win we are all banned.

[r3volution 3.0]

They are going to burn it all down.

You have it backwards man.

The *GOP* has been talking about burning it all down, because they want the state(s) to prosecute facebook.

...because they really care about irregularities in publishing law.

LOL

No, just kidding, because facebook says things critical of the GOP.

230 provides a safe haven for a variety of internet service providers, including Bryan of RPF, incidentally.

There's a fairly good chance that, sans that law, this forum would not exist (if the founders thought about the potential liability).

[RJB]

I dunno, I've seen strong evidence on this forum of negative neurological changes to the brain. If it's not soybean oil then it's definitely something else.

From one of my trips to Texas, I suspect Lone Star Beer as a potential culprit.

[Voluntarist]

Per registered decision, member has been banned for violating community standards as interpreted by TheTexan (respect his authoritah) as authorized by Brian4Liberty Ruling

May God have mercy on his atheist, police-hating, non-voting, anarchist soul.

[Voluntarist]

Per registered decision, member has been banned for violating community standards as interpreted by TheTexan (respect his authoritah) as authorized by Brian4Liberty Ruling

May God have mercy on his atheist, police-hating, non-voting, anarchist soul.

[nikcers]

Voluntarist is as convicted to his objective scientific ideology as anyone that opposes his stance. He is consistent and provides scientific data that supports his objective scientific based opinion. I am confident that the quote in his signature line is fact based. People are less than kind in their responses all the time. Some people have cuddly personalities others are abrasive. I think he is a good contributor and her speaking her mind was not ban worthy.

And, besides, only bans from @Danke count!

[Swordsmyth]

@Bryan, can someone be banned for expressing an opinion about whether someone else should be banned?