Thank you for giving me the time. The rest is unnecessary.
This isn't about being "lazy." I work all day long on research and reporting research. Because of other things I have seen of Stew Peters, I think he is likely controlled opposition. I think he is purposeful disinformation designed to discredit us. I don't know that for sure, but that is my takeaway from the times I have forced myself to watch him.
Among other things, I have some level of expertise in the topics he commonly speaks on (biology, chemistry, etc.). My knowledge and experience doesn't make me "right," but it does give me more tools to be critical than most people who listen to him. That experience allows me to make good arguments. In Stew's case I have made many arguments against his "evidence". I generally spend far more time than most people making those arguments because I always read all the source material. It is from the source material and my experience in interpreting those materials that I make my arguments.
Since this is where I make my arguments from anyways, I was hoping someone could provide me with information about the source material. You would think, with all the promotion it is getting, that someone else would have looked at his actual evidence.
Specifically my arguments against Stew or his guests have not been met with reasonable rebuttal or follow up argument; which is to say, as far as I know, my assessment has turned out to be the correct one in previous hoopla over his fear porn. This is why I don't want to waste my time with Stew. It has nothing to do with me being lazy. Nothing could be further from the truth.
In addition, even the very statement; "venom in the water to poison" confuses several things and is almost certainly complete bullshit. The sentence itself is non-sensible if you know what those words mean.
Thank you for giving me the time. The rest is unnecessary.
This isn't about being "lazy." I work all day long on research and reporting research. Because of other things I have seen of Stew Peters, I think he is likely controlled opposition. I think he is purposeful disinformation designed to discredit us. I don't know that for sure, but that is my takeaway from the times I have forced myself to watch him.
Among other things, I have some level of expertise in the topics he commonly speaks on (biology, chemistry, etc.). My knowledge and experience doesn't make me "right," but it does give me more tools to be critical than most people who listen to him. That experience allows me to make good arguments. In Stew's case I have made many arguments against his "evidence". I generally spend far more time than most people making those arguments because I always read all the source material. It is from the source material and my experience in interpreting those materials that I make my arguments.
Since this is where I make my arguments from anyways, I was hoping someone could provide me with information about the source material. You would think, with all the promotion it is getting, that someone else would have looked at his actual evidence.
Specifically my arguments against Stew or his guests have not been met with reasonable rebuttal or follow up argument; which is to say, as far as I know, my assessment has turned out to be the correct one in previous hoopla over his fear porn. This is why I don't want to waste my time with Stew. It has nothing to do with me being lazy. Nothing could be further from the truth.
In addition, even the very statement; "venom in the water to poison" confuses several things and is almost certainly complete bullshit. The sentence itself is non-sensible if you know what those words mean.