The list of sentences is reproduced from an another study, and the Yale page that I’ve linked does note that others have found examples of such constructions with ‘it’, so it is true that the asterisk might be unwarranted.

Thank you for the feedback, so basically you don’t perceive any difference between the sentences with regards to the person and number of the subject?

The video is half an hour long and I really don’t feel like watching it all to find out something that could be said in one or two paragraphs of text, so I ignored it at first. As I expected, the video deals with a bunch of more or less relevant topics that you or OP didn’t mention at all. It actually is a bit interesting, I’ve watched a part of it, and I do have to admit that US fire trucks are bigger than those where I live. The problem is that their deadliness is a consequence of several other factors, and only indirectly of their size. What you and OP decided not to do is to communicate that point with any nuance, and all that I could read from your comments is that, by some logic, getting hit by a 10-metre truck is much safer than getting hit by a 15-metre truck. OP complained about the driver “right-hooking” the cyclist, you just said the trucks are too big, do I really have to watch a half an hour video to understand why your comments don’t sound nonsensical?

I recommend using xcancel.com if you want to check something on Twitter.

The meme doesn’t really reflect reality, it’s just a weirdly remixed right-wing meme. Climate change denialists don’t ask for sources as they dislike them in general (Youtube videos and huffing your own farts is quite enough for them), they will just say the MSM has implanted the snow propaganda into your brain.

The rest of the world does without GIANT and dangerous emergency vehicles for one.

Could you show me those small and safe emergency vehicles that are used outside the USA? Because I’m outside the USA, I literally live near a firefighter station, and they’re all probably as big as US vehicles.

but it’s not a place you go for open and honest discussions between people from both sides of the aisle

Where do you go for such discussions anyway?

If you’re thinking of American right-wingers and fascists who are currently celebrating Trump’s victory, I must say their view of the world is so dark, negative and pessimistic, that nobody could really describe it as utopia-like. This is a brief respite for them, nothing more.

If you’re thinking more abstractly, or of some very specific incredibly lucky people, then I guess it could be so.

Wikipedia Signpost is mostly used for news and opinion pieces regarding WP, but every issue has this sort of humorous piece as well.

Yes.^[1]

Citations

^[1]it says so in the URL, after all ;)

I find it odd that the pic rejects Balto-Slavic unity and calls Sorbian “Wendish”.

Albanian might be a sub-branch of Illyrian, but there’s no solid consensus on the issue.

Thanks. It’s a part of history I know very little about.

I meant the “for over a hundred years” part specifically, I bolded it but it’s not as noticeable as it should be.

the US a terrorist nation for couping democratically elected leader in favour of dictators for over a hundred years

Is this really true?

Reminds me of the “help me budget this” meme.

“Have fewer genocides.”

“No.”

Germans excused Holocaust by… saying that it would prevent trans genocide?

This is too stupid even for a troll.

Then, you end up finishing the game

I.e. you do win…

Christianity developed in the Roman Empire?

I’m pretty sure we’re talking about the pictorial representation of Jesus, not when Christianity itself developed. Christian figurative art in Rome was rare and undeveloped, I highly doubt you have on your mind some examples of Roman portrayal of Jesus that actually support your idea. That’s why I described what I have found to be the situation in the middle ages, when the typical iconography zook shape - to the best of my knowledge, but maybe I’m talking with an actual art historian in which case you should have no problem with proving me wrong with examples.

I’m also confused about how you actually imagine the development of the supposedly racist Roman images of Jesus went about. At which stage did that happen, before or after Christianity became the state religion? Were Romans racist against the Middle East populations before Christianity too? Were Romans from the Apennine peninsula racist against them based on their darker skin colour, while themselves certainly being darker-skinned than e.g. Gauls?

Frankly this comes off almost as a conspiracy theory. Christian art in Europe developed its typical imagery when the vast majority of Europeans could have no direct contact with non-Europeans, before colonialism or coherent ideas about racial identities, when far-off lands were thought to be occupied by one-legged giants…

The comparison with your own childish vs adult drawings is simply off the mark. A more similar comparison could be provided by how artists depict the Vikings. It is well known today that the helmet with bull horns is made-up, and was probably never used by actual Vikings. Yet tons of people still portray them with such helmets, and most non-artists still have that same association in their minds. Why? Because a child growing up and developing their observational and artistic skills is not the same as a culture with its century-old symbols and images.

Admittedly the depictions of Jesus in art today are frequently done by more or less amateurish artists and are meant to be traditional in their style, which additionally makes them less likely to move away from the inherited imagery.