It's the framing that throws off AI.
Yes. That reframing changes the evaluation. AI does not have the Intuition that humans have... though I'm sure it can eventually copy it but I'm sure it would drive it mad 😆
If Owens’ effective position in the debate is understood as “the evidence presented so far is weak, incomplete, or unsubstantiated in key places” rather than “there is overwhelming affirmative proof he is a patsy,” then her performance looks stronger. She was better prepared on specific details (charges, print degradation, procedural points), forced Wilson into knowledge gaps, and consistently highlighted real vulnerabilities in the public case as it stood at the time of the debate. On that narrower question—how solid is the evidence right now?—she had the clearer edge in the exchange.
The original formal resolution was stronger on both sides (“overwhelming evidence of guilt” versus “overwhelming evidence of a setup”). Under that stricter framing, the absence of positive evidence for a frame-up still weighed against her. But if we judge the debate by the more modest claim she actually spent most of her time advancing—that the current evidence is not as conclusive as Wilson portrayed—then yes, it becomes much easier to argue she won the practical contest that occurred.
I mean the mistake here is using AI to replace CSRs... it can't because it's not human. If CSRs were solvable and didn't need humans, it would have been replaced a long time ago. Doesn't matter if AI can sound or even look human, it is not. Best to have human utilizing AI to provide better/faster service.
@HasanKhxnx I am not suicidal. I eat healthy food. The brakes on my car and truck are in good shape. I practice good trigger discipline and never point a gun at anyone, including myself. There are no deep pools of water on my farm and I’m a pretty good swimmer.
🚨 URGENT
Two days ago I was contacted by a high-ranking employee of the French Government. After determining this person’s position and proximity to the French couple, I have deemed the information they gave me to be credible enough to share publicly in the event that something happens.
In short, this person claims that the Macrons have executed upon and paid for my assassination. Yes, you read that correctly. More specifically, that the green light was given to a small team in National Gendamarie Intervention Group. I am told there is one Israeli that is on this assasination squad and the plans were formalized.
Again, this person provided concrete proof that they are well placed within the French government apparatus.
Further to this point, this person claims that Charlie Kirk’s assassin trained with the French legion 13th brigade with multi-state involvement.
Journalist Xavier Poussard’s life is also at risk. This is deadly serious. The head of state of France apparently wants us both dead and has authorized professional units to carry this out.
I ask that every person RETWEET and share this.
I do not know who in the American government can be trusted, since this source claims our leaders are aware. But I have more specific information which is definitively verifiable, should they care to reach out to me.
To the brave official in France who did this because they were so moved by the evil of Charlie’s public execution to risk their own life— May God bless you. Truly.
Let all be revealed.
@AsianDawn4 Fake. That jacket is gojek and that car looks Asian type. This is indonesia. Guns are banned here and, as others have mentioned, the video is too clear to be cctv.
@SpeakWithDeeDee Yup. In Indonesia, a majority Muslim country, other religions are allowed and welcomed. You can freely practice Christianity and Buddhism. There are Churches there. People have crosses in their houses and wear them openly.
Astrophysicist and geoscientist Dr. Willie Soon points out that "CO₂ is the gas of life"—challenging claims that it is a harmful gas capable of causing global warming, hurricanes, and extreme weather events.
He describes such claims as "nonsense".
"I've published scientific papers refuting all of these arguments."
He Studied 10,000 of His Own Patients, Found a 400% Increase in Childhood Illnesses Linked to Vaccines, and Lost His License for Telling the Truth
Stanford's Prof. Annelise Barron reveals the story of Dr. Paul Thomas, an Oregon pediatrician who believed in informed choice. He typically recommended a conservative, Danish-style vaccine schedule (≈17 shots by age 5) instead of the full CDC schedule, but honored parents' decisions for any path, including zero vaccines.
Dr. Thomas then did what more should: he looked at the real-world data. He analyzed thousands of children born into his practice, tracking diagnoses before age five. His study compared health outcomes—from ear infections and allergic rhinitis to ADHD—between his largely partially vaccinated/selectively vaccinated patients and the completely unvaccinated cohort.
The findings were unequivocal and alarming. The vaccinated children had a 4x higher risk of a wide range of health issues.
For publishing this objective, practice-based data, the system made an example of him. His medical license was revoked. His paper was retracted. He was professionally destroyed for telling an inconvenient truth.
This case is about more than vaccines. It's about the suppression of scientific inquiry and the silencing of a doctor who simply reported what he found in his own patient population. As Prof. Barron states, this was "real data" that should have been headline news, prompting a serious scientific discussion. Instead, it was buried.
When we silence messengers for their data, we are not protecting public health—we are protecting a narrative. The truth has a cost, and Dr. Paul Thomas paid it.
A food preservative used in sodas and thousands of other products may help improve memory and thinking skills in people with Alzheimer’s disease, raising the possibility that an inexpensive household chemical could help combat the nation’s sixth-leading cause of death.
A recent analysis of clinical trial data from 149 people with mild Alzheimer’s disease found that taking sodium benzoate daily for 24 weeks was linked to better thinking skills and lower levels of abnormal proteins in the blood—one of the disease’s hallmarks.