tbf, you’re a rando posting your opinion on it to the internet just like him, just in text format. Why should we listen to you?
With that said, everything needs to be taken with a grain of salt. You can listen, take it in, and research more if something doesn’t seem right to you.
Yes but one rando posting a video of another rando with no sources is even less credible than the singular rando just stating the opinion himself. People who believe “experts” without citations are unfortunately too common in this world.
There’s no difference between randos on the internet, everything is taken with a grain of salt and healthy suspicion. Doesn’t matter which rando it comes from.
Let me put it this way: If a man told me he was a medical doctor and another man also claimed to be a doctor and showed me a medical license written in crayons, which would I be more likely to believe?
Let me put it this way: Straw man arguments won’t work here.
edit: “A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction”
one is a licensed profession that is illegal to lie about and heavily prosecuted, the other is random people writing comments/posting videos on the internet. There is a world of difference.
A bunch of ragtag militiamen vs one of the most advanced militaries in the world. I get that they’re desperate, but this was an inevitable outcome (as terrible as it is).
This seems like you’re trying to make a factual claim. Again, I don’t disagree with it but you’re just a rando on the internet just like the dude in the video. At least he’s put his face and name to his allegations/opinions.
I think it’s telling there was no reply,
Because if you look closely with a keen eye,
There was just a guy,
No one knows who he is,
But he says to listen to his ideas,
Opinion after opinion but lacking constitution,
Unable to face the prosecution.
tbf, you’re a rando posting your opinion on it to the internet just like him, just in text format. Why should we listen to you?
With that said, everything needs to be taken with a grain of salt. You can listen, take it in, and research more if something doesn’t seem right to you.
Yes but one rando posting a video of another rando with no sources is even less credible than the singular rando just stating the opinion himself. People who believe “experts” without citations are unfortunately too common in this world.
There’s no difference between randos on the internet, everything is taken with a grain of salt and healthy suspicion. Doesn’t matter which rando it comes from.
Let me put it this way: If a man told me he was a medical doctor and another man also claimed to be a doctor and showed me a medical license written in crayons, which would I be more likely to believe?
Let me put it this way: Straw man arguments won’t work here.
edit: “A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction”
It’s not really a strawman when I say providing unsubstantiated evidence as proof is not ethical and will be frowned upon.
one is a licensed profession that is illegal to lie about and heavily prosecuted, the other is random people writing comments/posting videos on the internet. There is a world of difference.
I’m just trying to have a discussion, not indoctrinate people to my way of thinking. Pretty sure I haven’t made a single factual claim.
This seems like you’re trying to make a factual claim. Again, I don’t disagree with it but you’re just a rando on the internet just like the dude in the video. At least he’s put his face and name to his allegations/opinions.
I think it’s telling there was no reply,
Because if you look closely with a keen eye,
There was just a guy,
No one knows who he is,
But he says to listen to his ideas,
Opinion after opinion but lacking constitution,
Unable to face the prosecution.