Maggie’s Motivational Pic Thread v2.0 - - New Rules - See Post #1

1722043604818.png
 
Careful.....there is a response coming. Something about videos, masturbation, and porn induced ED.
It'll include references to:
1. Step moms stuck in dryers.
2. Step moms stuck under beds.
3. Step daughters.
4. Step sisters.
5. Mother in-law.
6. Wife and wives friend.
7. Teacher.
8. Massage.
9. Neighbor.
10. Friends wife.
Etc.
Etc.
Then some stupid claim about unrealistic expectations!

Edit: I never had a hot step mom, but if I did, and her hand got stuck in the dryer and we were home alone, I couldve seen certain things unfolding.

Unrealistic expectations......pfffft!
 

I looked this up for my own edification and I found out the following:

- all the big players like WWF, Polar Bears International, USA Today, Carbon Brief Interactive, AFP Factcheck, VerifyThis, and etc. claim that this is false.

-they all use plenty of unverifiable data, graphs and charts to show you why there is a decline and how it will decimate the world population of polar bears.

- not one actually include any population comparisons, just “estimates” of the current population they say is in trouble.

- they all use terms like “most scientists”, “experts agree”, and “scholars” with the only ones quoted being professors of ecology studies and experts from similarly aligned organizations.

- I did find one site that does an actual light scientific analysis using population data from all of the above sites and data from actual scientists, Foundation of Economic Education.

A snapshot from the article:

1722103722733.png


The article is worth reading.
 
I looked this up for my own edification and I found out the following:

- all the big players like WWF, Polar Bears International, USA Today, Carbon Brief Interactive, AFP Factcheck, VerifyThis, and etc. claim that this is false.

-they all use plenty of unverifiable data, graphs and charts to show you why there is a decline and how it will decimate the world population of polar bears.

- not one actually include any population comparisons, just “estimates” of the current population they say is in trouble.

- they all use terms like “most scientists”, “experts agree”, and “scholars” with the only ones quoted being professors of ecology studies and experts from similarly aligned organizations.

- I did find one site that does an actual light scientific analysis using population data from all of the above sites and data from actual scientists, Foundation of Economic Education.

Sorry... for a brief moment, I thought you meant "World Wrestling Federation..." :oops: :ROFLMAO: