You said I went back to saying you are the author.
I have never said you have said I’m the author. I’ve implied that your rhetoric should be directed at the authors of the article, and not me, since I’m not arguing you.
The fact that you couldn’t suss that out sort of supports my notion of you having a somewhat bad level of reading ability.
You’re fucking pathetic, you know that? You can’t accept you made a mistake so you go fucking ages on Lemmy pretending you didn’t. Who are you trying to delude except yourself? Not me, that’s for sure
My argument is that you misunderstood, because of your reading capabilities. For anyone with proper reading comprehension, that’s kinda evident from reading this thread.
You have been arguing by trying to have it both ways.
You claim the author gave a suggestion of what is inside black holes. I asserted that the suggestion doesn’t meet the criteria of a suggestion for a scientific article and therefore isn’t a suggestion.
You then respond with the equivalent of, “I’m not the author and not defending the content.”
This is Space, not Astrology. The criteria for article content is higher.
That’s not your claim. You said I went back to saying you are the author.
Show it or apologize.
I have never said you have said I’m the author. I’ve implied that your rhetoric should be directed at the authors of the article, and not me, since I’m not arguing you.
The fact that you couldn’t suss that out sort of supports my notion of you having a somewhat bad level of reading ability.
“Show it or apologise”
What are you 12?
“So you are back to pretending I wrote the article.”
Nothing I wrote implied that.
You’re fucking pathetic, you know that? You can’t accept you made a mistake so you go fucking ages on Lemmy pretending you didn’t. Who are you trying to delude except yourself? Not me, that’s for sure
The author said, “maybe it’s different inside”. My restating the author is not an accusation that you wrote the article.
You don’t understand context even. Sheesh. This is what I mean by you having a shit reading level.
Yes, it is.
I arguing that you didn’t understand the article. Then you reply to that by disagreeing with the thing you misunderstood.
You don’t have an argument so you deflect and insult.
My argument is that you misunderstood, because of your reading capabilities. For anyone with proper reading comprehension, that’s kinda evident from reading this thread.
You have been arguing by trying to have it both ways.
You claim the author gave a suggestion of what is inside black holes. I asserted that the suggestion doesn’t meet the criteria of a suggestion for a scientific article and therefore isn’t a suggestion.
You then respond with the equivalent of, “I’m not the author and not defending the content.”
This is Space, not Astrology. The criteria for article content is higher.