I’ve said before and I’ll say again that I accept that possibility, but that doesn’t mean the fact that we appear to agree about climate change must mean that climate change is the wrong answer.

You know the first time I ever seriously studied the control the media has over society? In college. Liberal, liberal college. In a sociology class. A soft science. By a hippie female teacher. Not based at all.

She was the one railing about the media control and such. She was the one who made us research and write papers on it. A liberal sociology teacher taking a taxpayer paycheck in a college.

This is not some unique truth you’ve found that you can give Q credit for. Bernie Sanders has been talking about this shit since the 70’s. It’s not a conservative or liberal issue. We know the media can have an agenda and execute that through media manipulation.

That doesn’t mean the points they’re making are factually wrong. And when you know how to do the research, you don’t need the media to confirm that yeah, climate change does appear to be a legitimate problem, and yes, evolution really has nothing near a strong scientific counter-argument, and yes, the argument for wearing masks while vaccinated does actually make sense if you listen to their explanation and not assume you know the strawman argument they’re going to make.

That’s my point. When you’re actually an objective, competent researcher, you assume EVERYONE is lying to you. Every single claim gets researched. Every credential is questioned.

And sometimes, the media is closer to the truth than you are.

And sometimes, I find myself lacking when trying to verify Q’s credentials and therefore cannot prove he isn’t lying to me.

And with respect, I don’t agree that you’re eviscerating lies, and feel like there are definitely arguments you may be overlooking. I just really don’t feel like it’s appropriate for me to be playing site debunker when you all have been gracious enough to keep me on so far.

I’ve said before and I’ll say again that I accept that possibility, but that doesn’t mean the fact that we appear to agree about climate change must mean that climate change is the wrong answer.

You know the first time I ever seriously studied the control the media has over society? It college. Liberal, liberal college. In a sociology class. A soft science. By a hippy female teacher. Not based at all.

She was the one railing about the media control and such. She was the one who made us research and write papers on it. A liberal sociology teacher taking a taxpayer paycheck in a college.

This is not some unique truth you’ve found that you can give Q credit for. Bernie Sanders has been talking about this shit since the 70’s. It’s not a conservative or liberal issue. We know the media can have an agenda and execute that through media manipulation.

That doesn’t mean the points they’re making are factually wrong. And when you know how to do the research, you don’t need the media to confirm that yeah, climate change does appear to be a legitimate problem, and yes, evolution really has nothing near a strong scientific counter-argument, and yes, the argument for wearing masks while vaccinated does actually make sense if you listen to their explanation and not assume you know the strawman argument they’re going to make.

That’s my point. When you’re actually an objective, competent researcher, you assume EVERYONE is lying to you. Every single claim gets researched. Every credential is questioned.

And sometimes, the media is closer to the truth than you are.

And sometimes, I find myself lacking when trying to verify Q’s credentials and therefore cannot prove he isn’t lying to me.

And with respect, I don’t agree that you’re eviscerating lies, and feel like there are definitely arguments you may be overlooking. I just really don’t feel like it’s appropriate for me to be playing site debunker when you all have been gracious enough to keep me on so far.