No, but you aren’t doing that, you’re posting obnoxiously long things that do not need to be posted. Post a link.


Does it hurt when your false narrative crumbles hence you don’t want evidence openly shared on the forum at eyes reach without a click


You can link to the evidence, but copying and pasting is bad for the site’s search engine optimisation.

It says a lot about the way you think that you see everyone as an attack against you.


Does it hurt when you try and read and that’s why you aren’t understanding what I’m saying?


This post is in itself creating a false narrative.


He’s not saying “don’t post it.”

He’s saying to post the evidence, but just in link form. If anything, only copy and paste in the meat of the argument.


There is no rule, we’re asking you to stop being lazy and obnoxious. Understand your arguments enough to at least be able to paraphrase things you read, and to provide links to sources when necessary. Otherwise you’re not even asking us to debate with you, you’re spamming pre-constructed essay-length arguments made by other people. Nobody wants to deal with that irreverent of what the subject matter is.


You’re all pretty butthurt from what I can tell


I mean… you still haven’t responded to the issue with dihydrogen monoxide…


Not worth de time


Why not? It’s literally in every single person who has autism.


It’s quite funny how you all went of topic because you’re too cowardly to address the evidence, lol


It’s quite funny how you haven’t posted the evidence because you didnt actually understand it and can only copy-paste it.


Hey… I made an argument above which responded to your initial evidence, and you haven’t responded.

Also, I’m interested on your take on the whole dihydrogen monoxide thing…


I read the article fully way before sharing quotes from it, I understood it perfectly well and it correlated with some ideas I previously had, did you read and understand it because you haven’t addressed it intellectually once?


Probably because it was so pointless to the subject that I didn’t think it was worth addressing? I do prioritise in terms of quality.

Yes, it’s an odd way of referring to water


Let me show you what response I was talking of

“odd” != “scientific”


You are taking this meme too far.


Nothing has to be a meme if you don’t want it to be one!


Then you can argue its points without copy-pasting the whole article. Thanks.