daws101
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #341
Nope.Really what was it then ?Another blatantly false comparison.You said "it's not possible to prove," not "there is not enough evidence to prove." The former indicates a non-falsifiable statement, such as the claim "chocolate tastes better than vanilla." It can't be proven false, and it can't be proven true. That's the kind of claim you made with regard to AGW, "it can't be proven false."You've provided no credible evidence constitutional violation by Liberals.
really where?
Besides you are wrong there is more than enough evidence to prove climate change is real.
There is no evidence to prove it's not .
For your "logic" and assumption to be valid there would have to be equivalent amounts of evidence for both arguments.
Fail.
However, I don't want to over tax your minute brain. I realize you will never get the point.
It wasn't a comparison, moron.
It was no statement of fact.
It was a clear a comparison as apples and oranges.
The words you used were the exact same words used in the invalid argument, dumbass.