Chippys_mittens@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 months agoHee Hee Ho Ho Ha Halemmy.worldimagemessage-square451fedilinkarrow-up11.06K
arrow-up11.06KimageHee Hee Ho Ho Ha Halemmy.worldChippys_mittens@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 months agomessage-square451fedilink
minus-squarenull@piefed.nullspace.lollinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 months agoLmaooo Taylor Lorentz is credible! My sides!
minus-square|IlI|lIIl|IlIll|Il|IllI|@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 months agodeleted by creator
minus-squarenull@piefed.nullspace.lollinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 months ago something more substantive Yeah, let me link you to 40 minutes of glaze content. That’s how we provide evidence for things, right?
minus-square|IlI|lIIl|IlIll|Il|IllI|@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 months agodeleted by creator
minus-squarenull@piefed.nullspace.lollinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-22 months agoTo answer your question, yes this is deflection. You linked to 40 minutes of content and went “see, proof”. Just wall after wall of text and cherry picked character references and accusations of people that have nothing to do with Hasan. All typical of a Hasan viewer though, so nice work.
minus-square|IlI|lIIl|IlIll|Il|IllI|@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 months agodeleted by creator
minus-squarenull@piefed.nullspace.lollinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 months agoSo it’s either a published, peer reviewed paper, or this chaotic dump of slop? Those are really the only 2 things you can imagine?
minus-square|IlI|lIIl|IlIll|Il|IllI|@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 months agodeleted by creator
minus-squarenull@piefed.nullspace.lollinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-22 months agoAgain, neither of their credentials (or hackery) have anything to do with whether or not Hasan shocked his dog. Like I said, your focus on this is deflection. Or since you want to use debate terms “appeal to authority fallacy”
Lmaooo Taylor Lorentz is credible! My sides!
deleted by creator
Yeah, let me link you to 40 minutes of glaze content. That’s how we provide evidence for things, right?
deleted by creator
To answer your question, yes this is deflection.
You linked to 40 minutes of content and went “see, proof”.
Just wall after wall of text and cherry picked character references and accusations of people that have nothing to do with Hasan.
All typical of a Hasan viewer though, so nice work.
deleted by creator
So it’s either a published, peer reviewed paper, or this chaotic dump of slop?
Those are really the only 2 things you can imagine?
deleted by creator
Again, neither of their credentials (or hackery) have anything to do with whether or not Hasan shocked his dog.
Like I said, your focus on this is deflection. Or since you want to use debate terms “appeal to authority fallacy”