Breast Mourning

submitted by Musky from i.imgur.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (38 children)

What "ESG" funds were used for the Dutch study?

How much?

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (37 children)

I'll be asking the Questions here! Thank you!

So you are telling me who's funds were used? And guaranteeing it wasn't a shell company or false front? How much was based on assumptions and assumed common sense? How does a study in Finland relate to all other societies with their own unique structures in the world? Does the base logic even translate across languages? Do you understand the level of corruption in finances, as all fiat is based on debt, ensuring that the holder of the currency is literally paying for their own enslavement, turning the world into a Skinner box of sorts? Does it make sense for a billion years of evolution to suddenly go wrong because we invented basic tools such as the wrist watch and the power loom, causing the need to cut off our own genitals to become well? Why can't there be effeminate men without the need to chop off their reproductive organs? You acknowledge ESG funds as bad. Why?

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (36 children)

As far as I can tell there's no external money. A bunch of academics on salary got access to look at a stack of medical records. There's no obvious cost that needs to be covered.

I believe you're made that up because you need to bring into question the findings, and there's biased enough with their data or methods, to bring the facts around to your beliefs that you are clinging to, because they're the beliefs of your in-group and you don't have the personal strength to switch to what's true.

You acknowledge ESG funds as bad.

You're lying about that too.

[–]DONKEYBALOGNA 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Let me ask you a question what's the difference between testicular cancer and breast cancer because I don't have any breasts but I do have testicles and sometimes I find myself sitting here and I'm thinking my testicles are really dirty greasy and I'm like do I need to get checked for cancer what do you think cuz like I don't have any breasts because I'm a male I think are the testicles a clue that I'm male let me ask you a question give it to me straight don't mess around give me the straight answer

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (34 children)

You're lying about that too.

Yes. I was considering changing the wording as that Question, but chose not to as your anticipated reply doesn't make any sense. You pushed back against ESG, and are now claiming that you do not view them as bad. Do you see the paradox here? Why argue against their inclusion if they are not bad?

Originally I had more to say here, but I apparently failed to save my first reply and have forgotten key elements of what I had earlier typed.

because they're the beliefs of your in-group and you don't have the personal strength to switch to what's true.

I had much to say about this as well (on this second attempt of a reply). But then I remembered, I don't share personal information online, and thus am incapable of fending off this personal attack upon my character. Nor should I have to for that matter. *deleted*

On that note. I did not expect such a personal attack from you.

I S̤̺̞uppose __'__ __ ___ _______ ___. And that's just fine with me.

­͉̟͕͓̣̞̗̣̯̩͕̻͚̣͊̽ͮ̿ͨ̌ͧͣ̓̈̊̅ͯ̈́

Ĥ̅͛ǝ̮̺͕̲̰llo ʍoɹlp' I,m Qnǝsʇᴉouɐqlǝ.̬̘̟ͅ

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (33 children)

You pushed back against ESG,

No i didn't.

I asked what group you think funded the Netherlands study. I couldn't see any, but o wondered if you were lying or knew something i didn't.

Looks like the former.

and are now claiming that you do not view them as bad.

I didn't claim that either.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (32 children)

So you simply asked for proof of ESG funds with no motivation? What a strange behavior. And what an even more bizarre hill to defend. You claim this is not an issue, while clearly this is important to you somehow. You ignored so many Questions, and yet this not only requires accusations of lies, but multiple unprompted retorts. Why?

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (31 children)

So you simply asked for proof of ESG funds with no motivation?

You made the claim that the study was funded by such a fund. I wondered if it was true. tbh I thought if you answered I'd be able to work out what an ESG fund is.

You claim this is not an issue, while clearly this is important to you somehow.

I don't believe that there was any external funding. When people say things that I suspect are wrong, I tend to call them out on it.

You ignored so many Questions

Such as?

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (30 children)

Do you wish for me to Quote every Question you ignored is this thread? I can but it would be silly. And not the point at all. To be clear, I was discussing your over reaction to the topic. Not the topic itself.

Now back to what I was originally saying. Money gets results. Even if that money is based on lies. You can turn a tidy profit by pushing any agenda no matter if it is the truth or it is not.

https://www.investopedia.com/news/gender-equality-potential-driver-esg-funds/

ESG subverts nations.

Environmental Social Governance. Not a single one of those things are the business of banks. And they have no right to be Governing, performing social engineering, nor dictating environmental science based on their banking practices.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (29 children)

Do you wish for me to Quote every Question you ignored is this thread? I can but it would be silly.

Just any that you're interested in why I didn't answer.

Now back to what I was originally saying. Money gets results.

This doesn't relate to the Netherlands paper does it? There wasn't any money involved in that. It's not climate change denial or religious rights to be prejudiced against science, gays and education.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (27 children)

Just any that you're interested in why I didn't answer.

Jesus Christ man. The next three sentences actually touches base on that. Did you not manage to get to the second sentence? How does context work? What is a paragraph and how do they work?

I was discussing your over reaction to the topic. Not the topic itself.

I was emphasizing how you singled out that one point and harped on it to the point of accusations of lying. How that you made ESG a major point of contention, and yet have no opinion on it. For some reason, emphasizing it's lack of inclusion. Which seems paradoxical and strange to me.

This doesn't relate to the Netherlands paper does it? There wasn't any money involved in that.

You don't dictate my comments, or what the point of them is. Simply saying it doesn't have to do with what you said is garbage. In addition, simply saying there was no outside influence or funding, is a childish assumption. Everything in existence has outside influence, and it is up to the observer to determine bias and effect.

It's not climate change denial or religious rights to be prejudiced against science, gays and education.

I'm going to need for you to give that another try. As I am uncertain of what you were trying to say there, or how it is related to the rest of the reply.