Quote (fender @ Apr 24 2017 09:28pm)
why don't you follow your own advice there? i did not say that you specifically stated there were only two options but i said you "acted" like it, and that's what you did.
Oh I only "acted" like it, according to your own perverse interpretation of what I said. It wasn't actually said but you'll accuse me of it anyways.
Quote
you can try to backpedal all you want now but that's the scenario you presented as the alternative to trump's way of cutting back on environmental protection. the fact that you're trying to make this about semantics again, playing the old "well that's not exactly what i said" game just shows how uninterested you are in an intellectually honest conversation about trump's approach towards climate change and environmental protection.
Im not backpedaling, clown.
I stand by what I said.
Your own butchering of the english language and fabrications do not reflect poorly on myself.
Quote
you of all people talking about strawmen is just hilarious when i just exposed TWO of your major "arguments" as such: the alleged willingness of scientists that happen to oppose trump's climate change view to jail dissenters simply for dissenting AND the notion that trump's way is somehow reasonable because NOT gutting the EPA somehow means no access to affordable energy for americans (again, not explicitly but i think you are well aware of what you were trying to do there, not that i'd ever expect someone like you to admit it)...
These are strawmen.
You are trying to say im attacking strawmen by misrepresenting what I am saying and imagining its saying something else.
But its ok im only "acting" that way right, you arent actually accusing me of saying that. but you'll attack it as if thats what im doing anyways!
This post was edited by cambovenzi on Apr 24 2017 07:34pm