I want to know what exactly he lied about at 1:30 of that video which destroys his credibility. Plain and simple.
Quote:
|
You've demonstrated your ability to reasonably discuss points like that in the past, so there's no point in going into details, is there? If I say what it is, will that result in a meaningful rational discussion? You'll have to convince me.
|
SO it is my fault now that you won't answer a simple question.
Quote:
|
No, saying someone lied is not calling them a name, it's calling the statement they made untrue.
|
Saying that someone has lied IS calling them a liar. Like saying that someone stole something is the same as calling them a thief. It goes hand in hand.
Quote:
Hey look, so far you have just name called.
How many threads on AGW have I started, if I'm such a zealot? A zealot should have started far more than zero.
So you said I called someone a name, which I didn't, and then said that was the usual tact (did you mean tactic?) of an AGW zealot (which I'm not, and it isn't the usual tactic, that's just rhetoric to make an emotional point when a real one can't be made).
One might say you misrepresented things to your own ends! 
|
Way to obfuscate photon. You posted that he lied at 1:30 of the video and I asked you what exactly. This is now 3 posts in which you have not answered.
It would be very strange that a AGW believer would lie (on video in front of an audience) about evidence bringing the science that supports his position on AGW into disrepute. That simply defies logic.
I would really like you to explain this.