Technically speaking, it can be if they take a shot of Nyquil every time they think about smoking the cigarette.
Of course, that would just lead to other problems.
Please share a study that backs up your statement.
While we’re talking about burden of proof, how do we even know you have a “partner?” For all we know, you’ve been lying to us from the start.
I think it’s time for you to furnish us with that proof, if you want us to take anything you say seriously.
Ah yes, 20. Obviously 20 evidences is a lot of evidences. No wonder you’re so impressed.
How much anecdotal evidence is used to prove each of the studies you shared above, do you think?
Well you’re so good with sharing studies - maybe I should ask you to share a study that it’s false?
And everything on Facebook is completely factual!
Facebook is widely known for only hosting completely factual information!
And I suppose if I asked about what law requires it, you’d say it’s a double-secret law that isn’t posted anywhere.
Lol they don’t.
How could they?
If you want to walk around the house covered in your own shit, the government won’t stop you.
And yet you don’t hold yourself to that standard. How quaint.
I don’t need to dispute something that (a) is bullshit and (b) we are not forced to do unless we handle food or merchandise in a commercial setting.
Also, no, I don’t need to question why I should wash my hands if they’re converted in shit.
Yes, you’re trying to provide studies that correlate to an unrelated viewpoint. We see that.
But now that you’ve disputed the benefit of washing one’s hands, I understand why you misrepresent those studies.
I see you’re tired of being called out, so now you’re challenging me.
How droll.
I suppose I can’t have a rational conversation with someone who disputes the benefit of washing their hands.
You’re disputing that hand washing is healthy?
Wow. And I thought you were a nutter for your unsafe driving.
It is up to the person making the challenge (you) to provide valid studies.
But if you want a study: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/32919/1/1177009870.pdf
Lol, of course I do.
Those were all independent studies. They were not interrelated. Therefore, the data from one study can’t be directly applied to the others - unless another study is first undertaken to test it. That’s how studies work.
So, you’re saying:
I’m not even touching the ridiculous microchip statement 🤣
If she’s smart, she’ll break up with you now - before you either die in a crash, or go to jail for killing someone.
On the contrary, they show that you’re trying to reinterpret data to demonstrate a viewpoint that wasn’t tested.
New Amsterdam
(because it became New York)