> can all agree that there are certain things which are provably not facts? In the abstract, sure, presuming your interlocutor shares a common enough epistemi

> can all agree that there are certain things which are provably not facts? In the abstract, sure, presuming your interlocutor shares a common enough epistemic framework, but good rhetoricians can craft slippery arguments. Instead of "anthropogenic climate change is bollocks and climatologists are all paid-off liars," how about "climate change models have been shown to have errors". The first statement itself is bollocks, but that latter is true (if also misleading). It is unlikely but possible the moon is made of cheese. Cheese is delicious on crackers. If astronauts ate moon-cheese, it would be delicious on crackers.