They’re not protecting you from Tiktok. They are protecting their interests from China.

What does the paragraph above the one you posted say? The paragraph under the header “Findings”

I’m sorry, was that a refutation?

Kicks like a mule! Oh, sorry…

This study found a link between screen time and autism by looking at TV exposure among very young children, nevermind phones and tablets.

https://www.earth.com/news/toddler-screen-time-linked-to-atypical-sensory-behaviors/

It makes sense in a way. How we process the world might be a bit messed up with we were exposed to lots of bright shapes and loud sounds doing impossible things before our senses were fully developed.

Belief in god or astrology is not anti-scientific, it is unscientific.

Anti-scientific is evangelizing that the belief in god or astrology is a replacement for science.

Environmental factors (screen time) while a child’s sensory apparatus is not fully developed has been linked to development of ADHD and Autism.

https://www.earth.com/news/toddler-screen-time-linked-to-atypical-sensory-behaviors/

The thing that keeps us from living lives of abundance is not a lack of technology.

I’m just nice so I have a lot of friends. A lot. I’ll stick up for them and they’ll stick up for me. Don’t mess.

That’s still a ways off, you’ll ruin your pants.

Burgers it is!

And the DND did realize it until now. Sounds about right.

Is that what I’m doing? Why do you keep responding?

What you’re doing lacks the coherence to even be called ‘projection.’

FAAAAAMILY VAAAALUUUUUUEEEES

I would feel like you answered my substantive response with a question about breakfast, and given your track record on analogies I thought I’d just skip the part where I try to figure out if it makes sense and ask you the answer directly.

You’re one of these people who seems to think the world works how they think it should work.

How would YOU feel?

No I rejected it on the basis that fraud is currently illegal.

It doesn’t matter if it remains illegal. You get tried for things that are currently illegal. If they decide to repeal those laws about investor fraud, then your comparison to pot users makes sense. AFTER they repeal those laws Donald might be able to seek some recourse. And right after that you can kiss the economy goodbye, since it’s all built on investor confidence.

And saying that some states have ‘legalized fraud’ basically shows that you don’t understand or accept the legal definition of fraud.

My God, are you literally this stupid or are you being paid to pretend you are?

No and no

They key phrase is “they made it… legal.”

Your thought exercise is about something legal that used to be illegal. Has fraud suddenly become legal? No? So what’s your point? Your ‘lying on a resume’ example made more sense, even if it was ridiculous.

Bleach7295 fun fact: I used to think it was said ‘tangenitally.’ But that’s actually what you get on a nudist beach or something.

This has been a Bleach7293 fun fact.