Already feels like this sometimes

I’ve definitely noticed people who challenge anything you say by asking for a source, but make tons of unsourced claims themselves.

The evil version of this is when people cite a click bait article, you go to the article and read the attached study and the study is not backing up their claims in any meaningful way. Like come on bro you clearly haven't read this study don't cite it and claim I need to educate myself.

I think it's totally reasonable to ask for a source about a historical claim if something hasn't been true for over a decade?

EDIT: My source for this opinion is here

Or when you bring sources and they straight up ignore them entirely...

I understand not wanting to read or go through the entire Marxist-Leninist books I recommend, not everybody has the time for that, but a 5-20 minute article? You waste more time debating me after the fact than you would have just reading the article, at least do me the courtesy of skimming it and trying to engage with my points.

ngl, I don't comment nearly as often anymore out of concern for anything I say to be misconstrued, argued, or wanting verification like this meme. Ya'll, I've got a job and a life, I can't/don't want to sit here and fight people. The worst gets assumed of anything and it gets difficult to have productive, much less positive discourse online.

The sources are released under a source-available license, you are legally prohibited from reading them

There are clips out there of FOX news saying "if global warning is real, then why is there a blizzard?!"

I literally had to cite the page number from the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 Public Law 117-328 that covered how the $800M that Trump keeps telling everyone FEMA spent on migrants was a completely different fund than the disaster relief fund that FEMA uses for hurricanes. Which the DRF was established originally as it's own fund in the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988 Public Law 100-707

It's page 4,730 where that item is located for anyone wondering.

I fucking hate what online interactions have become. I think I've easily read over 200,000 pages of government legislation, federal regulation, and legal proceedings since June because of the lies one orange shit stain keeps telling. I really do hope that the Republicans can move past that fucker, it was a lot easier to talk politics.

If somebody would ask for a source it would already be a big improvement. Usually you are just classified as idiot if you dare to have a different view.

You get people who believe jet contrails only started appearing in the 90s even though that they didn’t is literally within living memory.

The one on the right is a bearded 8 year old who never saw snow. He has a beard due to micro plastics. He thinks all pictures online of snow are AI generated. He’s also an asshole to everyone and rightfully so because his life and planet has been doomed. Welcome to 2034.

I rather have a source to support a claim instead of "but it's how I feel so it's real! Scientists don't know anything, stop debunk my feelings with facts because I know I'm right! I read it on Facebook!"

We need more reliable and supported sources and less fake news.

I've already had people demand "source?" for the most mundane facts. Why yes steroids do enhance physical ability.

Family Member: Russia needs to invade Ukraine because they need a shield against NATO.

Me: But NATO wasn't going to attack them. It's a defensive organization.

That's what THEY want you to believe. (Was not able to clarify who "they" were during conversation, but got the impression it wasn't nato)

Already feels like this sometimes

Source?

birds used to be real

I've heard a saying, two things you should never do on the Internet are argue or explain. It takes up a lot of mental energy and time to do it for no reward.

And that's the same person who makes wild absurd claims but well just go off the rails and tell you to do your own research

Let's not vilify people asking for citations. With AI it's more important than ever to verify what you're reading.

People are interested in sourcing of information in 2034? I see that as an absolute win.

I asked my employer provided AI assistant if this is true and it assured me that natural snowfall was disinformation invented by leftists in order to destroy our capitalist utopia.

Winter is on its way out due to climate change. In around the year 2100, it's estimated that there will only be 3 seasons left, no winter. And summer will be much longer and much hotter. So the 3 seasons will be spring, then a 2-season long summer basically, then fall. That's it.

But you can already see the disappearance of winter today because there's much less snow and it's much warmer than like 30 years ago. (Speaking for Germany)

It's gotten to a point where I just go ahead append a warning that I have no source and am just making casual conversation.

Source: my previous comment on Lemmy.

terrifying

No, that's the current trend here (Switzerland plains).

"The sky is blue"

"No stupid that's woke liberal propaganda Trump 2024"

Guilty. Show me the almanac. I don’t trust nobody on the internet. Everybody speaks like they’re an expert.

@sharkfucker420 We would have flying cars and spaceships in future

The future:

Hashtag Rule'34

"My source is that I MADE IT THE FUCK UP"

President of the USA (probably in a videogame)

F'real I think my kids have had maybe one snow day so far, and my oldest is in second grade. We live in southeast Mass.

I thought about buying a new snowblower, but the fact is that I think we had maybe one storm in the past 5 or 6 years where I actually would've used my old one. The little dustings we had were easily cared for by a shovel.

I also have a part of my driveway that has a lot of tree overhang and never really gets much snow on it. It also happens that the winter morning sun has a direct path to this patch of asphalt, so if we get only an inch or two, it'll all melt away as soon as the sun comes up. Assuming it's not too overcast.