It's interesting that you can only parse this feedback, that I and several others have given you over the years, as a "debate" tactic.
You've read hundreds of my conversations. Is this a "debate tactic" you've seen me use with other people? No. I say things like this to you, and again, I'm not the only one…
It's interesting that you can only parse this feedback, that I and several others have given you over the years, as a "debate" tactic.
You've read hundreds of my conversations. Is this a "debate tactic" you've seen me use with other people? No. I say things like this to you, and again, I'm not the only one, because you are one of the most consistent and belligerent examples of the Dunning-Kruger effect that I have ever seen.
To be extremely clear, we don't both have "truths." We both have OPINIONS. And yes, opinions can be more or less correct. They can also be totally incorrect because they're based on nonsense or gut feelings that have never been tested against facts or evidence.
That's why you say obviously incorrect things about a range of topics with absolute and totally unearned confidence, you appear to take nothing onboard when you're corrected, and often, though thankfully not in this case, do so in the most arrogant and combative tone possible.
It is, therefore, IMPOSSIBLE to have a "debate" with you, because you don't know enough, and I'm not interested in wasting hours of my time digging up facts and evidence to fill in the gaps in your knowledge. Why on Earth would I do that over and over again for a guy on the internet who has proven himself unwilling to learn? That's why I end up deciding to stop wasting my time.
Things MIGHT be a little better if you approached them as simple conversations instead of "debates." If you had the good sense to recognise when you're not particularly well-informed about a topic and approached conversations with a little humility. You might even learn something. But I've already suggested that several times, and it also seems to be beyond you.
"Its interesting how you debate."
It's interesting that you can only parse this feedback, that I and several others have given you over the years, as a "debate" tactic.
You've read hundreds of my conversations. Is this a "debate tactic" you've seen me use with other people? No. I say things like this to you, and again, I'm not the only one, because you are one of the most consistent and belligerent examples of the Dunning-Kruger effect that I have ever seen.
To be extremely clear, we don't both have "truths." We both have OPINIONS. And yes, opinions can be more or less correct. They can also be totally incorrect because they're based on nonsense or gut feelings that have never been tested against facts or evidence.
That's why you say obviously incorrect things about a range of topics with absolute and totally unearned confidence, you appear to take nothing onboard when you're corrected, and often, though thankfully not in this case, do so in the most arrogant and combative tone possible.
It is, therefore, IMPOSSIBLE to have a "debate" with you, because you don't know enough, and I'm not interested in wasting hours of my time digging up facts and evidence to fill in the gaps in your knowledge. Why on Earth would I do that over and over again for a guy on the internet who has proven himself unwilling to learn? That's why I end up deciding to stop wasting my time.
Things MIGHT be a little better if you approached them as simple conversations instead of "debates." If you had the good sense to recognise when you're not particularly well-informed about a topic and approached conversations with a little humility. You might even learn something. But I've already suggested that several times, and it also seems to be beyond you.