Irremarkable

joined 11 months ago
[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 1 points 5 months ago

Congrats you've fallen for oil company FUD from the 70s.

In what world is nuclear + renewables not a possibility. Nobody here is wanting nuclear + coal. You sit here and bitch and whine about fallacies while your entire argument relies entirely on a strawman.

[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 3 points 5 months ago

Some people really don't think before they speak do they

[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 85 points 5 months ago (2 children)

You mean to tell me the guy who's only rich because daddy ran a emerald slave mine in apartheid South Africa isn't a good person? Never.

[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 33 points 5 months ago

People still buying into oil company FUD from the 70s

[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 14 points 5 months ago

I'm not sure you know how ages work

[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 13 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (8 children)

I mean, click a couple links and it's right there

MI: 619 PA: 693 WI: 661 All of registered voters

Using the amount of total registered voters in each respective state and a 95% CI, we get the following margins of error MI: ±3.939% PA: ±3.723% WI: ±3.811%

Depending on the exact lead (NYT only shows round percents, not specific numbers for each response), all of those are potentially within the top end of that margin of error.

Am I trying to claim that a swing from being down by ~4% to being up by ~4% means nothing and is indicative of nothing? Of course not. But man, most people really do not at all understand how statistics work, and I really wish people would stop talking out of their ass about it.

[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 12 points 5 months ago (12 children)

Most people have a really, really awful understanding of how statistics work.

[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Of course, which is why I said within reason. As long as you're making an effort to make your diet varied, I find trying to religiously track macros tends to be fairly counterproductive for most people, as it makes the whole process far more of a pain in the ass.

[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 10 points 5 months ago

shrimp and tilapia are fairly cheap

This varies hugely based on location, primarily distance from the ocean. Pound for pound, beef and pork are far cheaper than basically any seafood in my region.

[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 23 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (6 children)

As long as calories in < calories out, the source of those calories matter much less (within reason). You could lose weight eating nothing but oreos and hostess snack cakes as long as calories in < calories out. Not great for you for obvious reasons, not least of which vitamin deficiencies, but you'd lose weight.

[–] Irremarkable@fedia.io 9 points 5 months ago

There's had to have been at least one downfall scene already

view more: ‹ prev next ›