Yeah, there’s no real juxtaposition here, the bottom picture leads directly to the top picture.

Adorableness does not a quality meme make.

Same exact thing as “How can mirrors be real if our eyes aren’t real?”

I think they were joking

Sorry you’re getting downvoted for being right, this “format” makes no sense.

Yeah, the comic adds absolutely nothing to this very tired “fun fact”, it’s not a successful meme format at all imo.

No, the issue is that he didn’t understand how the technology he was using worked. I mean, one of Apple’s most prevalently advertised features is their product integration, it’s like, their whole deal.

Key people: Jaime Harrison (Chair) Chris Korge (Finance chair) Jason Rae (Secretary)

Taken from Wikipedia because who actually knows that shit

Ooh, I’ve had that, it adds a surprisingly mustardy taste to the milk…

Same reason Voldemort’s name is a riddle and is actually Riddle: JK Rowling is lazy. She’s also a TERF piece of shit, but that’s unrelated as far as I can tell.

"Have you ever had a honk where you, if you, you would, you could, you would honk you so much you could honk anything?

Yes it is, because “boomers,” by definition of the word’s intended memetic use, are old yes, but more specifically they are old rich people in power. Using “boomer” as an insult doesn’t hurt them. Meanwhile the actual boomers are literally trying to stigmatize and criminalize queerness. It’s the same logic that makes it ok (encouraged even) to be racist against white people, it just doesn’t affect us.

It doesn’t count as self-awareness if he disassociates from the statement entirely, it’s actually the opposite.

Something tells me it’s a made-up scenario that affected literally no one.

Sorry, that was meant for someone else, lol.

“No” what? I didn’t ask you any yes or no questions, I asked you to relate whatever the hell it is you’re talking about to what I was talking about, which you have failed to do yet again. And you’re a liar, you said you weren’t gonna read this.

Lol, you do realize you debunked your own claim by the end of the paragraph, right?

Lololol it started with my single point and then you changed the subject so you could…flex your in-depth chemistry knowledge on me I guess? But without actually making any salient point, so I’m left, as you say, yammering on to what is essentially a brick wall.

At least I gave one, even if it was sarcastic. Once again, all you offer is non sequiturs and haughty derision. I guess I just want to know what you think this discussion is about, because all I’ve gotten out of it is vacuous meta-argument trollery.

Mmm yes, because “double downing” is a phrase an educated person uses. Got it, lolol.

Look, I would totally accept that I was wrong if I knew what you were referring to, but I literally don’t know, you haven’t explained your opinion at all. Like, please! Tell me what you mean! What am I wrong about?