If you you can't make a compelling argument without being loud, aggressive and demeaning, then you have a weak argument.
Every time I see him debate he is trying to physically dominate the space, belittle his opponent and drown them out. If you were to read a transcript of these discussions instead, you would wonder why he was invited to the conversation.
He's just like that vax quack Peter Hotez. Can you imagine a debate between those two? That is, IF you could find a scientific point upon which they disagree.
If you you can't make a compelling argument without being loud, aggressive and demeaning, then you have a weak argument.
Every time I see him debate he is trying to physically dominate the space, belittle his opponent and drown them out. If you were to read a transcript of these discussions instead, you would wonder why he was invited to the conversation.
He's just like that vax quack Peter Hotez. Can you imagine a debate between those two? That is, IF you could find a scientific point upon which they disagree.