4 ms·

I don't want rhetorics, this is not a matter of winning an argument, I'd like to see your claim substianted to decide if they are valid and receivable. Until n

I don't want rhetorics, this is not a matter of winning an argument, I'd like to see your claim substianted to decide if they are valid and receivable. Until now I've only see unsubstantiated bold claims, cherry picked provided evidence actually not supporting them when read and various logical fallacies attempts to get out of providing data supporting your point (You waiting for someone else to support their point is not proving yours, appealing to authority by linking to 1hour video debate, etc.)

ThomPete 9y ago
What claims? I have provided plenty of links. What claims have I made and been asked to provide links to that I haven't? I am not cherry picking anything. I giving examples as the only one in this thread btw. Go back and read the thread. Where on earth am I appealing to authority? I link to a debate with two sides debating this very issue to prove a point which is that experts disagree about this which was one of my points. It's a proof of that. You on the other hand link to things and appeal to consensus, how is that useful for anything? I literally gave you links not only to claims about New York being under water but other similar claims. The video is experts warning about the warming and the consequences being imminent. So that critical thinking crash course you talked about, perhaps you should start by applying it to yourself.