Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.2K

YouTube? Logic Would dictate let a fool speak and prove himself a fool?

But the king didn't cut out the tongue of the flatearther because he feared his lies he feared the truth.

I am not a flat earth believer but their videos are interesting and a rational real science minded person would never get emotional and name call people for a theory and testing the theory they would just try to either replicate your test or experiments or come up with their own to prove their theory.

The emotional name calling attacks from the normies against flat earth people raises red flags with me and from what I've seen the flat earth people talk and act reasonable and rational

YouTube? Logic Would dictate let a fool speak and prove himself a fool? But the king didn't cut out the tongue of the flatearther because he feared his lies he feared the truth. I am not a flat earth believer but their videos are interesting and a rational real science minded person would never get emotional and name call people for a theory and testing the theory they would just try to either replicate your test or experiments or come up with their own to prove their theory. The emotional name calling attacks from the normies against flat earth people raises red flags with me and from what I've seen the flat earth people talk and act reasonable and rational

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (427).
[–] • 0 pt

Well no, i said specifically:

  • He doesn't know the topic - clue #1
  • His stories are internally consistent in a weird way the way mentally ill people construct them - clue #2
  • HIs body language doesn't match his word - clue #3

I didn't say he was lying. I called him an idiot, sure, but really he just comes across as mentally ill.

How do you think a diagnosis of mental illness is done?

[–] • 0 pt

Well I'm not sure how one would diagnose mental illness, but all I really care about for the topic at hand is the veracity of his information and the conclusions he has drawn about the various subjects which he talks about. Like I said before, I was under the impression that you were going to comment on his information rather than his mannerisms, and I apologize for wasting your time having you write about something I don't quite care about.

to reply to both of your comments in the same place

All you've said about his information is that he "clearly" knows nothing about what he's talking about, and honestly, you've defamed most people who look into conspiracies.

Just pulling this out to be comletely blunt about this point:

Yes, of course I have defamed people looking into conspiracy theories. I am one of those people. Why do you think I can write about Eric Dubays mental illness off the top of my head in a reasonably general way and reference Joe Rogan episodes/clips, Sitchin and Erich?

Lol.

Sounds like you're pretty good at countering people without actually touching the information they're discussing. Professional almost.

Do you have a counter to any of his ideas or theories?

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

Wait ... what?

I just gave you my reasoning for why Dubay is mentally ill. You response is ... dramatic pause ... you want me to DEBUNK the stories of a mentally ill person?

Are you fucking retarded?

// EDIT: How about we flip this bitch around. You asked for additional information. I was polite and gave it to you. How about we have you tell us why I am wrong about Dubay being mentally ill.

[–] • 0 pt

Well, I'd like you to, but if you can't you can just continue what you've been doing and keep calling people names and defaming them.

Again, like you originally said. Pay attention to what people aren't saying. What you aren't saying is anything about the actual information presented and instead just calling him mentally ill and me retarded.

Edit: I don't really care if he's mentally ill or not, thats not the point. The point is the information presented.