aluminiumtrioxid

surely you people mean "false flag!!4!four"

I hate this image so much. why is the output of your function an argument of it

SUCH POSTMODERN NEO-MARXISM REEEEEEEEEE OK, hypothetical question. I just posted an article that categorically states Donald Trump accepted a huge back channel bribe from Saudi Arabia to not make a big deal over that reporter. But the article was from Mother Jones. Do you believe it? Or that Hillary Clinton not only ordered the hit on Vince Foster, she actually shot him herself then put the pistol in his dead hand. But the source is The Blaze. Do you believe it? My belief or lack thereof is going to be directly proportional to the evidence presented in either case and not be particularly influenced by whatever reputation these publications are supposed to have (which I am not aware of, because the political leanings of niche publications in the USA are tremendously irrelevant to my life). You can't just handwave the question of whether a news story is objectively true or not away with "oh but who cares, people will believe whatever they wanted to believe in the first place". That way lies madness.

SUCH POSTMODERN NEO-MARXISM REEEEEEEEEE

Appropriate then:

Don't mock them, man. They study the blade. You are so unfair. Some of them are serious intellectuals.

i can think of a reason why

I think you might be, at least you have severe reading comprehension problems. Read my posts again, slowly. It may hurt your head, but try. "no u" top level comeback, truly worthy of an intellectual of your weight class Literally your post: "it is hard to believe that they would've married at age 40 and started working with no previous experience" The original: "My wife and I... worked every single day of our 30 year old marriage" I know this might be a difficult leap of logic for you, but try to imagine: if somebody says that they worked every single day for 30 years... that is a statement about those 30 years and carries no information about what came before. It is an entirely valid interpretation of the same text that they started working in their 20s, have been in the workforce for 20 years, then met and married, and worked for another 30 years during their marriage. Magical, innit?

"how could somebody possibly marry late in life? that's just not a thing that happens, that is impossible" Yeah. They married at 40 and started working without any previous experience Are you literally retarded? "We worked every single day of our 30 year marriage" in no way implies "we did not work before we got married". I already knew that you didn't know the difference between necessity and sufficiency, but this astonishing failure of elementary logic is still pretty baffling.

"how could somebody possibly marry late in life? that's just not a thing that happens, that is impossible"

pick one

Found the original.

Source? Google turns up nothing.

The strange case of the missing Joyce scholar.

most I got out of this article is that he was ridiculously handsome in his youth

Holy **** that is a good quote.

lol

reality has a well-known liberal bias

surely you mean "lol"

how dare they

This is extra funny with Sharpie whining about "censorship with extra steps" barely two posts above

First Amendment Experts Warn Facebook Banning InfoWars Could Set Completely Reasonable Precedent For Free Speech

This sounds like a really great way to get yourself killed in a medical emergency just because the help you were calling for couldn't arrive in time.