Pemalite said:
Are you seriously arguing against the need for providing evidence for a claim? REALLY?
I stated in my prior post that I will be providing evidence for my claims and going forth I had an expectation for you to do the same, you failed to do so and thus only provided irrelevant opinion pieces and thus was discarded.
Common sense tells me that you would respond with evidence, not opinions. |
It's not arguing if it's common sense, apparently, and while I could 'fix' it, you went ahead and disregarded anything you saw as opinion, but also common sense points, as well as any questions. Any clear opinion or claims, I could give you and understand, but if you're going to ignore common sense and especially questions and just lump it all together, then why should I assume you would legitimately take any of it into account going forward, linked evidence to back up claims or not?
Even my first point about the planet being on fire/greener, you point out the lack of linked evidence and how you expected it. Then when I explain why I didn't post the link, since I did earlier in the thread based on that point, while figuring you likely saw it since you were quite active, you said you did read it, which was why you responded with NASA links yourself. Why ask for the evidence again if you already knew what I was talking about and had gone over what I had already provided prior? I bother to link the NASA evidence to that claim, along with my explanation, and then you ignore absolutely everything else as if it was all claims and opinion?
An argument using only evidence, where you can't think outside the box and question any of it, especially what's clearly not unquestionable fact, where you can only stand firmly behind that initial evidence, will lead nowhere constructive. That's about as common sense as it get's as far as I'm concerned.
