Attention, all idiots roll up your sleeves and relax your but cheeks. This is happening.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/20/africa/argentina-quarantines-mpox-ship-intl-latam/index.html
When are you gonna admit your wrong TFM? I am going to go invest all my savings in bitcoin, vote Democrat, and wife up a fat black single mom with at least 2 baby daddies and adopt her kids. When you gonna admit your wrong TFM and get rid of that weird sex doll huh? Get yourself a real woman like I am about to.
(sarcasm)
RadiumLE85
boosted
If Hitler had won World War 2, our history books would have talked about how Hitler deduced that the Jews were planning to exploit the white western world into creating and fighting to defend a Jewish State in the Middle East and valuing the Jews lives and feelings above all else. And some would call it a crazy theory that the West would never have allowed to happen in real life.
China supports Iran not cucking.
Russian THOT tries to kill her male superior aka rival with mercury.
RadiumLE85
boosted
It seems lat to get the full panick before the election but still looks like they are going for it.
RadiumLE85
boosted
TIL that Nazis support women's rights because women supposedly voted for Hitler en masse, and thus taking women's rights away would be bad because women have proven to be good Nazi supporters in the past.
The truth it that in 1930s Germany religion was vastly more impactful, and Protestant women only supported the Nazis due to them being the Protestant party. None of that is replicatable in the modern world.
RadiumLE85
boosted
yeet 
:ina_hammer: 
RadiumLE85
boosted
Buddha teaches us not to be trapped by our suffering. If one tree in the garden is sick, you must tend to it, but don't let it take away from the other healthy trees around you.
You may have suffering in your heart, but don't let it overcome the other joys that you have in your life.
You may have suffering in your heart, but don't let it overcome the other joys that you have in your life.
What are you gonna do UK? Are you ready to do the thing or just vote harder? 🤣😆😂https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2024/08/10/uk-rolls-out-totalitarian-social-media-policy-that-carries-prison-time-for-problematic-posts-n2643206
The government told us 2023 they had hypersonic missiles deployed in the Philippines. Now they say they finally had a successful tests. Then what's deployed in the Philippines?
RadiumLE85
boosted
Third Man 
Did your pampered regime of choice, say, the Soviet Union, spice'n'shiet it's own statistical measurements like this when it existed?
>Just over a year ago, we commented on the "massive" revisions that the statistical arm of Biden administration's Department of Energy - the Energy Information Administration (EIA)...
>[from @zerohedge] "The Biden admin will not stop fabricating data and draining the SPR to push the price of oil lower"
>Adding to those who questioned the 'fabrication' that:
>[from @zerohedge] "When is the last time demand estimates were revised lower"
>Zoom forward a year and the 'revisions' across multiple (government-supplied) macro data items are now well known and widespread... and statistically noteworthy that the revisions tend to be negative (implying the initial data was 'optimistic')...
>Payrolls (7 of the last 10 months have seen downward revisions)...
>Consumer Confidence (9 of the last 12 months have seen confidence revised lower)...
>The situation has become so widespread that even the mainstream media is forced to admit that there is something odd going on.
>Specifically, circling back to our initial thoughts, Reuters reports this morning that a string of dramatic revisions to official U.S. oil consumption data have unnerved market participants who rely on the figures to trade.
>The EIA published a monthly update last week that showed U.S. oil consumption at a seasonal record in May as motorists burnt more gasoline than even before the pandemic.
>That data conflicted with weekly updates published that month showing oil and fuel demand struggling to even match last year's levels.
>The EIA says the weekly figures for May were off because preliminary readings overestimated gasoline output and undercounted exports. The agency does not expect weekly estimates to be as accurate as monthly data, but to be consistent in showing general trends.
>Of course it just happens that the initially 'weak' demand figures helped lower crude and gasoline prices at a time when inflation was rearing its ugly head once again and Bidenomics was hitting the wall. And as is the case with payrolls revisions (or consumer confidence), traders reactions to the revisions are dramatically less sensitive than they are to the original prints.
>However, as Reuters reports, these discrepancies (we are being polite) are starting to make market participants question the version of reality they are being sold.
>"It makes you wonder why anyone is paying attention to the weekly numbers," said Tom Kloza, head of energy analysis at Oil Price Information Service (OPIS). Many fuel marketers have expressed disbelief over the revisions the EIA made to its numbers in May, he added.
>A trader at one of the largest commodities distribution firms said the revisions left them befuddled, and warned such changes could ultimately hurt consumers as decisions on how much fuel to import are influenced by the EIA data.
>"It's a trend that's a little concerning to me," GasBuddy analyst Patrick De Haan says.
>"The EIA has been the bedrock for analysts, but skeptics may be gaining more validity to arguments that the EIA numbers aren't jiving to the real world."
Jivin' to the real world, you say?
zerohedge.com/energy/numbers-arent-jiving-real-world-huge-revisions-leave-traders-questioning-biden-admins-energy
>Just over a year ago, we commented on the "massive" revisions that the statistical arm of Biden administration's Department of Energy - the Energy Information Administration (EIA)...
>[from @zerohedge] "The Biden admin will not stop fabricating data and draining the SPR to push the price of oil lower"
>Adding to those who questioned the 'fabrication' that:
>[from @zerohedge] "When is the last time demand estimates were revised lower"
>Zoom forward a year and the 'revisions' across multiple (government-supplied) macro data items are now well known and widespread... and statistically noteworthy that the revisions tend to be negative (implying the initial data was 'optimistic')...
>Payrolls (7 of the last 10 months have seen downward revisions)...
>Consumer Confidence (9 of the last 12 months have seen confidence revised lower)...
>The situation has become so widespread that even the mainstream media is forced to admit that there is something odd going on.
>Specifically, circling back to our initial thoughts, Reuters reports this morning that a string of dramatic revisions to official U.S. oil consumption data have unnerved market participants who rely on the figures to trade.
>The EIA published a monthly update last week that showed U.S. oil consumption at a seasonal record in May as motorists burnt more gasoline than even before the pandemic.
>That data conflicted with weekly updates published that month showing oil and fuel demand struggling to even match last year's levels.
>The EIA says the weekly figures for May were off because preliminary readings overestimated gasoline output and undercounted exports. The agency does not expect weekly estimates to be as accurate as monthly data, but to be consistent in showing general trends.
>Of course it just happens that the initially 'weak' demand figures helped lower crude and gasoline prices at a time when inflation was rearing its ugly head once again and Bidenomics was hitting the wall. And as is the case with payrolls revisions (or consumer confidence), traders reactions to the revisions are dramatically less sensitive than they are to the original prints.
>However, as Reuters reports, these discrepancies (we are being polite) are starting to make market participants question the version of reality they are being sold.
>"It makes you wonder why anyone is paying attention to the weekly numbers," said Tom Kloza, head of energy analysis at Oil Price Information Service (OPIS). Many fuel marketers have expressed disbelief over the revisions the EIA made to its numbers in May, he added.
>A trader at one of the largest commodities distribution firms said the revisions left them befuddled, and warned such changes could ultimately hurt consumers as decisions on how much fuel to import are influenced by the EIA data.
>"It's a trend that's a little concerning to me," GasBuddy analyst Patrick De Haan says.
>"The EIA has been the bedrock for analysts, but skeptics may be gaining more validity to arguments that the EIA numbers aren't jiving to the real world."
Jivin' to the real world, you say?
zerohedge.com/energy/numbers-arent-jiving-real-world-huge-revisions-leave-traders-questioning-biden-admins-energy
Joined Aug 2023
