Could be indirectly inheriting the debt. They could’ve taken out a new/second mortgage to cover their gambling debts, for example. Sure, the kid could refuse the inheritance to avoid being stuck with that, but then they’re still out a house they otherwise would’ve had if not for their parents debts.

They do, in fact, make Lightning Mcqueen slides.

There isn’t any animal that is even remotely comparable in intelligence to what we see Pokemon capable of, so it’s not really fair to make that comparison.

Dolphins and Chimpanzees are widely considered the next most intelligent species after us, but they’re still far below us. You can teach a Chimp basic sign language, but you still can’t have a proper conversation with them, let alone come up with complex plans with them.

By comparison, Meowth is not only capable of all that, he’s better at it than J&J; iirc, most of their plans that almost succeeded were his ideas. Plus he’s extremely capable at subterfuge, considering he once successfully convinced Ash & Co. that he was done with Team Rocket and gained their trust, only for it to be yet another scheme. Not to mention his ability to operate highly complex machinery.

And mind you, there’s zero indication that Team Rocket’s Meowth is any more intelligent than any other Meowth, he’s just vastly more ambitious. They very clearly show that his more human like tendencies are a conscious choice, not something inherent to him. Other Meowths could learn English, they just choose not to(and at least one thinks TR Meowth is weird for doing so).

I don’t think you can answer this question for Pokemon in general, I think it would be species specific.

Meowth is clearly of human intelligence, for example. Hell, he’s smarter than Jessie & James.

Then you have the extreme end, where Alakazam has an IQ of 5000. We’re basically ants to them.

Not to mention pretty much every psychic pokemon in the anime can have proper conversations with humans using telepathy.

Which is besides the point because Greed is already one of the deadly sins in it’s own right.

Then democratic controlled congress fought for several years to have them be released for no real reason except to force him.

Yes, they did, and he kept refusing to do so, as was his right even if it made him look sus as fuck, especially since his excuse was the lie about being under audit. Only once he was under investigation for fucking fraud were his tax returns actually released, as evidence in the investigations.

Bro forgot to add his uncertainty tho

HIS uncertainty? Your method results in uncertainty. This guy counted each piece individually, as one should.

When has banning porn ever been profitable? Look at tumblr.

Three days grace - Animal I have become with a boner

Blink-182 - Edging with a boner

Friction is real, it’s the “force” of gravity that is an illusion.

MMS doesn’t have much bandwidth available and it’ll just compress instead of failing to send, so even android to android if you send a long enough HD video the recipient will get compressed garbage. Then, of course, there’s the fact any videos sent over MMS from android to an iPhone(and vice versa iirc) becomes compressed garbage no matter how long or HD the video was, but that’s more Apple’s fault than MMS directly.

Samsung messages app also supports RCS, depending on your carrier, though? It’s super fucking buggy and frequently switches back to sms so I still switched to Google messages, but it does technically have it.

He should’ve just looked after himself… I’m guessing the app would’ve punished him

Unfortunately, that is a possibility. I used to doordash, canceling an order before you pick up the food is NBD, but canceling after you have picked it up is likely at least a strike against the dashers account.

It’s still not actually needed for experienced users though, I haven’t had a virus in over 10 years, so it hasn’t had anything to catch.

Boy oh boy did it freak the fuck out about the exe I compiled myself from a python script I wrote myself, though. Had to specifically exclude it from defender to stop it from quarantining it every time it ran. All it does is check to see if a link on a website has been updated since last look…

Just in the last week or so Swift sent a cease and desist to the kid tracking her and other celebrities jets, aka already publicly available information. Just like when Elon tried to stop him, by trying to stop him she has Streisand effected the situation.

If and when Tom Cruise, Jim Carrey, or Steven Spielberg send their own cease and desist, then we can start making jet memes about them, too. Until then, they’ve got other shitty things we can bring up. Cruise is a cultist, Jim Carrey is/was an anti-vaxxer, and Spielberg… actually, I can’t think of anything else for him, let the Spielberg jet memes commence I guess.

Only half of the Zodiacs are inspired from real animals. Gemini is two humans, Virgo is a virgin woman, Libra is a Weighing Scale, Sagittarius is a Centaur with a bow, Capricorn is a Sea Goat, and Aquarius is… a cup of water, I guess?

The fact humans are able to track them is how we know the zodiacs are no longer accurate. According to astrology if you were born on Dec. 1 for example, you’re considered a Sagittarius… except you’re ACTUALLY a Scorpio, due to the constellations shifting.

Tell me you’re from Hexbear without telling me you’re from Hexbear.

It seems like a silly double standard for only one side to have a burden to prove their claim, but the other gets to claim the negation is true with no burden of proof.

Why is it silly that the claim originally presented should have to present evidence first? The counter-claim only has zero burden of proof so long as the original claim has failed to give any proof of their own.

For example, if you say “2+2 is 4” and my response is “NO IT IS NOT. IT IS 3! I REFUSE TO PROVE IT THOUGH”, not only will I be wrong in a classical arithmetic sense but I have presented no argument for why you ought to believe my new counter claim to your original claim. It would make no sense to believe me without more info in such a case.

You wouldn’t have to present an argument yet, at that stage. I’d think you’re really dumb for needing something like that proven to you, but the initial burden of proof would still be on me. However, when I quickly and easily provide proof that 2 + 2 does equal 4, THEN the burden of proof falls to you to prove your counter-claim.

“God doesn’t exist” is surely a statement right? If I tell you “god doesn’t exist” (in response or not to something you’ve said), this feels like I am claiming the statement “god doesn’t exist” is true.

This ties into the part you absolutely agreed with. The word “God” as it is defined now would not exist without the original unproven claims that God. Even if you’re not responding “God doesn’t exist” directly to someone who said “God exists”, you are if nothing else still responding to the original millennia old claim that they do exist. For that reason, it is always a counter-claim.

As for what makes counter-claims different from regular claims, it’s simply that the burden of proof lies first with the original claim. A counter-claim has no responsibility to prove their claim until such time as the original claim presents evidence supporting itself.

I don’t think we need proof to reject a claim like “god exists”. There’s no real good evidence for it and all attempts at proofs of this in the history of the philosophy of religion have been analyzed and critiqued to death in some pretty convincing ways.

I absolutely agree. That was kinda my point. If the claim ever did get some actually noteworthy evidence, then it would certainly need to be properly proven or disproven… but I don’t think that will ever happen.

So, for example if you tell me tax code says X, that is not a proof of what tax code says. It would make sense for me to not outright believe you (since we are strangers), but you could be telling the truth, so it seems equally silly for me to immediately jump to believing tax code doesn’t say X too.

The problem with that is I at least in theory could have looked up the tax code, remembered it, and then told you it correctly. Sure, I could have lied or remembered wrong, but it was 100% within my capacity to give you the accurate information, and even show you where I got the information from. With a claim about God’s existence, that’s impossible for either side of the debate as far as we know, and since the original claim was “God exists”, that side is, possibly forever, stuck holding the burden of proof.