I could be 24/7 on Lemmy and still do less harm for the environment than Greta ever will by simply just existing. You need to let go of your internalized racism.
Take a stroll through the posts on this community and tell how many of the “World News” are actually White News. Keep in mind white people make less than 10% of the population.
World News is not Lemmy, and looking at posts doesn’t determine the population make-up of Lemmy users. Neither does posts about White News, whatever that means, determine the race of then poster.
Nah, you’re just selectively looking at evidence without nuance or understanding of what they actually show, just like people who spout statistics to call black people violent. There’s a reason analysis is required to turn data into accurate conclusions, not just looking at it at face value like you are doing. What’s funny is you’re even using the exact same argument as them when called out.
If you actually understood your own conclusion, you would actually debunk every argument I made for why I don’t think your evidence supports your conclusion. Instead, you did this and proven to me the opposite.
I could be 24/7 on Lemmy and still do less harm for the environment than Greta ever will by simply just existing. You need to let go of your internalized racism.
which racism? this is the Internet, no one knows you’re dog!! OR which breed, for that matter.
Fuck chihuahuas though, right?
This isn’t the Internet. This is Lemmy, which skews male and white.
Source?
Take a stroll through the posts on this community and tell how many of the “World News” are actually White News. Keep in mind white people make less than 10% of the population.
World News is not Lemmy, and looking at posts doesn’t determine the population make-up of Lemmy users. Neither does posts about White News, whatever that means, determine the race of then poster.
Nah, you’re just selectively looking at evidence without nuance or understanding of what they actually show, just like people who spout statistics to call black people violent. There’s a reason analysis is required to turn data into accurate conclusions, not just looking at it at face value like you are doing. What’s funny is you’re even using the exact same argument as them when called out.
If you actually understood your own conclusion, you would actually debunk every argument I made for why I don’t think your evidence supports your conclusion. Instead, you did this and proven to me the opposite.
That’s a lot of words to say “lalala I can’t hear you”