• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    No? You haven’t presented any evidence whatsoever. If you actually posted evidence, or meaningfully contested the evidence I presented without making up conspiracy theories, then we could have a discussion. It isn’t true because I link it or false because you do, I’m the only one presenting evidence while you’ve ignored it.

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      you are just quoting propaganda. repeatedly. and claiming it’s evidence.

      then when i claim something as evidence, you claim it’s propaganda, not evidence.

      and around and around we go.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        No? I cited a broad variety of academic scholarship and primary sources, you never linked any sources to begin with.

        • Edie [it/it/its/its/itself, she/her/her/hers/herself]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          No no, see, they did make a bunch of claims as evidence. They may not have provided any sources for those claims and haven’t proven those claims true. But they did provide a lot of claims and say that it is evidence of something.

          That we require it to be more rigorous than that is not their problem

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I was genuinely hoping they weren’t saying their claims were evidence, but I fear you’re 100% correct here.