If you are talking policies that govern individuals, average is meaningless, you need to include the outliers. What I really said was, on average it’s somewhat true a bit more than half the time….with many exceptions, so incredibly far from a rule…far from “I can agree”.

You said “ Are you saying you do not believe that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)?”.
I pointed to one instance where (I assume) chromosomal males do not have an advantage over a chromosomal female in an athletic field….just an example of why I don’t believe it’s always true that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)..one you can’t contradict.

People are never equally gifted or talented, not even with themselves yesterday or tomorrow. I find the premise faulty.

Appears to, so far, in most but not all categories.
In many, the difference is minimal and an exceptional female will surpass males one day in most. Top ranked Kenyan woman already routinely beat top ranked non Kenyan males in long distance running, for one example.

I won’t extrapolate from a temporary skewed position, it leads to ridiculous conclusions….so I won’t be able to agree.
I can agree people believe that.

It’s not just sexual biology. It has nothing to do with genitals. It’s hormones, dna, rna, mental toughness, upbringing, training, health, environment, opportunity, etc. if someone born a woman wants to compete with men, and your position is correct, what’s the harm? If a trans woman, born male but never going through male puberty or taking estrogen and hormone blockers to reverse the effects wants to compete against women, what proof do you have to show any advantage? Two athletes excelling? Out of how many?

Now how expert are you in this field? Expert enough to define the exact point where each person has an advantage vs a disadvantage? I doubt it. But you think it’s fine to deny them the right to participate based on your ignorant assumptions. Do you accept such ignorant, biased assumptions to determine what you may do, how much you may participate in public events? I doubt you would accept it for a second. Think about that.

You want to equate them to non trans people while trying to prove how they’re so different. Pick a lane please.

No matter what your opinion, denying a citizen a chance to compete in public sports is totally unAmerican. I notice how you ignore that, as if to concede it under your breath. It doesn’t go unnoticed that you can’t address that. It IS the point.

Edit : as to the olympics, they have allowed trans gender athletes since 2004. If trans women are really men, why haven’t those records become equal between men and women?

Please, no blatant personal attacks, even if you feel they're deserved.
Besides, you can do better. Explain why his positions make him look and sound dumb.....use verifiable references to bolster your argument, he won't.

Absolutely false. He's outright saying that stopping eating meat, and nothing else, is equivalent to stopping smoking, which is an outright lie.
He sells a lifestyle, with books, blogs, websites, videos, and appearances for sale. There's nothing wrong with that, unless you claim to not have a financial tie to your movement or financial incentives to mislead and exaggerate. He clearly does, and lies about that too.

Insisting on honesty does nothing to remove personal responsibility for yourself. Please.

No one mentions Dr Williams because he's not making up studies or results, he's offering a personal opinion and explanation of his personal actions...not lying to convince others to follow suit out of misplaced fear....like your hero, "Dr" Greger.

It's proper to attack the zealous liar that's making a living selling lies....like "Dr" Greger, no matter when they appear on screen.

One more example of him lying....taking "Consumption of foods high in saturated AND industrially produced trans fats, salt, and sugar is the cause of at least 14 million deaths" and restated it as "consumption of animal foods (and processed foods) leads to at least 14 million deaths."...but the study conclusion he references doesn't mention animal foods at all, he just added that, and emphasized it over what the study actually said while completely omitting processed plant based foods, which are just as bad as the meat ones according to the study. That's lying. Lies like that make it difficult to take personal responsibility for your health, because you have to debunk them to get to the good advice/actual facts.

Trump's tour with the WWE happened years ago....but the bat shit crazy persona stuck.
Queen is LIVID. They have repeatedly asked, and then demanded that Trump stop using their music. He continues to use it anyway, because he's a narcissistic douchebag that shits on anyone not 100% in full on hyperbolic blind support of him.
Why can't some BLM activist or Muslim terrorist snipe HIM? PLEASE! No jury would EVER convict.
Sorry, can't upvote, because.....Trump.

You strike me as the type of person who likes to take the rights away for others it they don't do exactly as you do. I do not like your type - Begone please.

No, seriously, stop preaching for the sake of making yourself feel better than others - yours is simply an opinion, which carries no weight greater than mine or any one else's.

Thank you and good night.

Gluing the heat sink to the CPU? Please, no, don't give the OEMs that idea.

Please No!! *head explodes*

Dog, "Why why why must you keep doing this?? Please no more water torture! I told you the cat did it!!! NOOOOoooooooooo!"

Please explain, what law do you think the cop was violating?
If he had ORDERED the individual to respond or act, perhaps he would have been over-reaching. Because he only ASKED, there's absolutely no violation. If you give up a right because you were asked to, that's on you. Any time something that sounds like a command from a cop ends with "OK?", it's a request or question, not a command.
So, this cop knew he was under the constraint of the law, and did not actually violate anything.
Because the guy refused to give his name, the cop could have insisted he met the description of a fugitive (no doubt he did, there's tons of fugitives out there of every description) and held him until his identity could be verified...legally.
Get it straight please, no law was broken or even bent that I can see....by either party.

No no no no no....not the 10% thing again. Please no more of that.

@RedundantAgain...

Please, no, do not alter your course and no, there is nothing wrong with what you have or are doing. Quite the contrary.

Continue to sift well and offten and please enjoy.

I apologize for any consternation I have caused you.

Thank you.

I really dislike the rehearsed, measured, wry, ego-inflating cadence that most TV info dump droppers seem to adopt these days. Sure sometimes it attempts to appear to mean well but most of the time ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh please no.

If lucky goes with this idea, which I think is fine (please please, no drop down menu where you have to choose to go to the promoted vids, that would be a killer).... since there would be a rotation, could the promote time be much longer?

Since they won't be clogging up the front page.... and they won't be on the front page at any given moment.... having a longer promote time would be good, yeah?

And doublepromote has meaning again?

Wherever you end up, the contrast between background and text really needs to be stronger. It really shouldn't be a strain to read anything.

And the blue text on the light textured background of the Top Sifts area literally shimmers for me. I do hope that at least is fixed.

My personal preference is the light background. I physically feel pushed away with the dark.

But this is not about my personal preference -- it is about the casual visitor. As a constant user, I can choose my preference of light over dark (once you fix the contrast, oh please, oh please No gray letters!!!). I

I would go with the industry standard for the casual user, and most websites have a lighter background. What is the message you want to send to a casual user? The dark has a specific message, the light has a specific message. Which do you want to convey?