Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
We had to lower the standards because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
Oh I see. So you've just been making shit up this entire time.
That makes more sense now.
What'd I make up?
The police standards have not been lowered because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
That's you making shit up.
You are incorrect...
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
Nope, sorry. They can still require a 3-year program to become a police officer even if it's without that particular exam.
That'll change
Your baseless assumption is noted. You just like to make shit up.
Your lack of ability to support your argument is noted.
You’re the one making the claim.
I've supported every claim I've made. You haven't.
You’ve attempted to support your claims. You’ve just done a bad job of it.
I’ve supported my claims in showing that your interpretations are flawed.
You haven't produced a single piece of documentation that supports your argument.
We had to lower the standards because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
Oh I see. So you've just been making shit up this entire time.
That makes more sense now.
What'd I make up?
The police standards have not been lowered because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
That's you making shit up.
You are incorrect...
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
Nope, sorry. They can still require a 3-year program to become a police officer even if it's without that particular exam.
That'll change
Your baseless assumption is noted. You just like to make shit up.
Your lack of ability to support your argument is noted.
You’re the one making the claim.
I've supported every claim I've made. You haven't.
You’ve attempted to support your claims. You’ve just done a bad job of it.
I’ve supported my claims in showing that your interpretations are flawed.
You haven't produced a single piece of documentation that supports your argument.
I’ve produced explanations that show your documentation does not support your arguments.
It’s really quite simple. You make a wrong claim. I explain why it’s wrong. There’s no documentation on that. It’s just common sense.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
We had to lower the standards because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
Oh I see. So you've just been making shit up this entire time.
That makes more sense now.
What'd I make up?
The police standards have not been lowered because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
That's you making shit up.
You are incorrect...
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
Nope, sorry. They can still require a 3-year program to become a police officer even if it's without that particular exam.
That'll change
Your baseless assumption is noted. You just like to make shit up.
Your lack of ability to support your argument is noted.
You’re the one making the claim.
I've supported every claim I've made. You haven't.
You’ve attempted to support your claims. You’ve just done a bad job of it.
I’ve supported my claims in showing that your interpretations are flawed.
You haven't produced a single piece of documentation that supports your argument.
I’ve produced explanations that show your documentation does not support your arguments.
It’s really quite simple. You make a wrong claim. I explain why it’s wrong. There’s no documentation on that. It’s just common sense.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
You posted your opinion, without a shred of supporting documentation.
We had to lower the standards because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
Oh I see. So you've just been making shit up this entire time.
That makes more sense now.
What'd I make up?
The police standards have not been lowered because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
That's you making shit up.
You are incorrect...
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
Nope, sorry. They can still require a 3-year program to become a police officer even if it's without that particular exam.
That'll change
Your baseless assumption is noted. You just like to make shit up.
Your lack of ability to support your argument is noted.
You’re the one making the claim.
I've supported every claim I've made. You haven't.
You’ve attempted to support your claims. You’ve just done a bad job of it.
I’ve supported my claims in showing that your interpretations are flawed.
You haven't produced a single piece of documentation that supports your argument.
I’ve produced explanations that show your documentation does not support your arguments.
It’s really quite simple. You make a wrong claim. I explain why it’s wrong. There’s no documentation on that. It’s just common sense.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
You posted your opinion, without a shred of supporting documentation.
You said that already and I explained that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
If you make the claim that the moon is made out of cheese, then it would be up to you to prove that. It would not be my job to find documentation that the moon is NOT made out of cheese.
Is that really so hard for you to understand? It’s actually very simple. Do you need me to repeat that again for you?
We had to lower the standards because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
Oh I see. So you've just been making shit up this entire time.
That makes more sense now.
What'd I make up?
The police standards have not been lowered because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
That's you making shit up.
You are incorrect...
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
Nope, sorry. They can still require a 3-year program to become a police officer even if it's without that particular exam.
That'll change
Your baseless assumption is noted. You just like to make shit up.
Your lack of ability to support your argument is noted.
You’re the one making the claim.
I've supported every claim I've made. You haven't.
You’ve attempted to support your claims. You’ve just done a bad job of it.
I’ve supported my claims in showing that your interpretations are flawed.
You haven't produced a single piece of documentation that supports your argument.
I’ve produced explanations that show your documentation does not support your arguments.
It’s really quite simple. You make a wrong claim. I explain why it’s wrong. There’s no documentation on that. It’s just common sense.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
You posted your opinion, without a shred of supporting documentation.
You said that already and I explained that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
If you make the claim that the moon is made out of cheese, then it would be up to you to prove that. It would not be my job to find documentation that the moon is NOT made out of cheese.
Is that really so hard for you to understand? It’s actually very simple. Do you need me to repeat that again for you?
This is a debate, not a courtroom...lol. If you claim I'm wrong, it's up to you to provide evidence that I'm wrong, because you're not required to prove a negative. Otherwise, you're just talking out of your ass.
We had to lower the standards because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
Oh I see. So you've just been making shit up this entire time.
That makes more sense now.
What'd I make up?
The police standards have not been lowered because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
That's you making shit up.
You are incorrect...
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
Nope, sorry. They can still require a 3-year program to become a police officer even if it's without that particular exam.
That'll change
Your baseless assumption is noted. You just like to make shit up.
Your lack of ability to support your argument is noted.
You’re the one making the claim.
I've supported every claim I've made. You haven't.
You’ve attempted to support your claims. You’ve just done a bad job of it.
I’ve supported my claims in showing that your interpretations are flawed.
You haven't produced a single piece of documentation that supports your argument.
I’ve produced explanations that show your documentation does not support your arguments.
It’s really quite simple. You make a wrong claim. I explain why it’s wrong. There’s no documentation on that. It’s just common sense.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
You posted your opinion, without a shred of supporting documentation.
You said that already and I explained that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
If you make the claim that the moon is made out of cheese, then it would be up to you to prove that. It would not be my job to find documentation that the moon is NOT made out of cheese.
Is that really so hard for you to understand? It’s actually very simple. Do you need me to repeat that again for you?
This is a debate, not a courtroom...lol. If you claim I'm wrong, it's up to you to provide evidence that I'm wrong, because you're not required to prove a negative. Otherwise, you're just talking out of your ass.
Ok. I claim that Neptune has bowling alleys on it. Prove me wrong. Make sure you provide evidence and the appropriate documentation.
Apparently, you weren't able to understand me the first two times so we're going to have to go to a demonstration. Maybe then you'll finally understand, but I doubt it. I'm finding out that I have to be very patient with you and explain things very slowly.
This isn’t a debate. It’s a tutorial. A very basic one.
We had to lower the standards because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
Oh I see. So you've just been making shit up this entire time.
That makes more sense now.
What'd I make up?
The police standards have not been lowered because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
That's you making shit up.
You are incorrect...
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
Nope, sorry. They can still require a 3-year program to become a police officer even if it's without that particular exam.
That'll change
Your baseless assumption is noted. You just like to make shit up.
Your lack of ability to support your argument is noted.
You’re the one making the claim.
I've supported every claim I've made. You haven't.
You’ve attempted to support your claims. You’ve just done a bad job of it.
I’ve supported my claims in showing that your interpretations are flawed.
You haven't produced a single piece of documentation that supports your argument.
I’ve produced explanations that show your documentation does not support your arguments.
It’s really quite simple. You make a wrong claim. I explain why it’s wrong. There’s no documentation on that. It’s just common sense.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
You posted your opinion, without a shred of supporting documentation.
You said that already and I explained that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
If you make the claim that the moon is made out of cheese, then it would be up to you to prove that. It would not be my job to find documentation that the moon is NOT made out of cheese.
Is that really so hard for you to understand? It’s actually very simple. Do you need me to repeat that again for you?
This is a debate, not a courtroom...lol. If you claim I'm wrong, it's up to you to provide evidence that I'm wrong, because you're not required to prove a negative. Otherwise, you're just talking out of your ass.
Ok. I claim that Neptune has bowling alleys on it. Prove me wrong. Make sure you provide evidence and the appropriate documentation.
Apparently, you weren't able to understand me the first two times so we're going to have to go to a demonstration. Maybe then you'll finally understand, but I doubt it. I'm finding out that I have to be very patient with you and explain things very slowly.
This isn’t a debate. It’s a tutorial. A very basic one.
Well, you just got schooled...for free, even. You're welcome!
We had to lower the standards because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
Oh I see. So you've just been making shit up this entire time.
That makes more sense now.
What'd I make up?
The police standards have not been lowered because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
That's you making shit up.
You are incorrect...
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
Nope, sorry. They can still require a 3-year program to become a police officer even if it's without that particular exam.
That'll change
Your baseless assumption is noted. You just like to make shit up.
Your lack of ability to support your argument is noted.
You’re the one making the claim.
I've supported every claim I've made. You haven't.
You’ve attempted to support your claims. You’ve just done a bad job of it.
I’ve supported my claims in showing that your interpretations are flawed.
You haven't produced a single piece of documentation that supports your argument.
I’ve produced explanations that show your documentation does not support your arguments.
It’s really quite simple. You make a wrong claim. I explain why it’s wrong. There’s no documentation on that. It’s just common sense.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
You posted your opinion, without a shred of supporting documentation.
You said that already and I explained that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
If you make the claim that the moon is made out of cheese, then it would be up to you to prove that. It would not be my job to find documentation that the moon is NOT made out of cheese.
Is that really so hard for you to understand? It’s actually very simple. Do you need me to repeat that again for you?
This is a debate, not a courtroom...lol. If you claim I'm wrong, it's up to you to provide evidence that I'm wrong, because you're not required to prove a negative. Otherwise, you're just talking out of your ass.
Ok. I claim that Neptune has bowling alleys on it. Prove me wrong. Make sure you provide evidence and the appropriate documentation.
Apparently, you weren't able to understand me the first two times so we're going to have to go to a demonstration. Maybe then you'll finally understand, but I doubt it. I'm finding out that I have to be very patient with you and explain things very slowly.
This isn’t a debate. It’s a tutorial. A very basic one.
Well, you just got schooled...for free, even. You're welcome!
I think most people would have understood the point by now. Looks like you still haven't figured it out yet.
I'm still waiting for your documentation to prove my claim wrong by the way. Your failure to address that is kind of the point that you're making for me, but you're clearly not smart enough to see why that is.
We had to lower the standards because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
Oh I see. So you've just been making shit up this entire time.
That makes more sense now.
What'd I make up?
The police standards have not been lowered because entrance exams are racist and recruitment is down.
That's you making shit up.
You are incorrect...
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
Nope, sorry. They can still require a 3-year program to become a police officer even if it's without that particular exam.
That'll change
Your baseless assumption is noted. You just like to make shit up.
Your lack of ability to support your argument is noted.
You’re the one making the claim.
I've supported every claim I've made. You haven't.
You’ve attempted to support your claims. You’ve just done a bad job of it.
I’ve supported my claims in showing that your interpretations are flawed.
You haven't produced a single piece of documentation that supports your argument.
I’ve produced explanations that show your documentation does not support your arguments.
It’s really quite simple. You make a wrong claim. I explain why it’s wrong. There’s no documentation on that. It’s just common sense.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
You posted your opinion, without a shred of supporting documentation.
You said that already and I explained that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
If you make the claim that the moon is made out of cheese, then it would be up to you to prove that. It would not be my job to find documentation that the moon is NOT made out of cheese.
Is that really so hard for you to understand? It’s actually very simple. Do you need me to repeat that again for you?
This is a debate, not a courtroom...lol. If you claim I'm wrong, it's up to you to provide evidence that I'm wrong, because you're not required to prove a negative. Otherwise, you're just talking out of your ass.
Ok. I claim that Neptune has bowling alleys on it. Prove me wrong. Make sure you provide evidence and the appropriate documentation.
Apparently, you weren't able to understand me the first two times so we're going to have to go to a demonstration. Maybe then you'll finally understand, but I doubt it. I'm finding out that I have to be very patient with you and explain things very slowly.
This isn’t a debate. It’s a tutorial. A very basic one.
Well, you just got schooled...for free, even. You're welcome!
I think most people would have understood the point by now. Looks like you still haven't figured it out yet.
I'm still waiting for your documentation to prove my claim wrong by the way. Your failure to address that is kind of the point that you're making for me, but you're clearly not smart enough to see why that is.
The point, is that you got schooled.
