i have to have a point?
This from the guy who never has one.
 

Not sure why you are so bothered that I disagreed with you on something that you have to insult someone for it.

I didn't think of that until I saw this. That explains a lot about the swamp or deep state.

Not sure why you are so bothered that I disagreed with you on something that you have to insult someone for it.

Because it wastes my time trying to counter your opinions based on hypotheticals and "objective" suppositions based on nothing but assumptions and a strict policy of disagreeing with anything that's based on common sense and historical context.

Because it wastes my time trying to counter your opinions based on hypotheticals and "objective" suppositions based on nothing but assumptions and a strict policy of disagreeing with anything that's based on common sense and historical context.

Don't think of it as a waste of time.  I learn from many of your postings.  You're google-fu is stronger than mine.  So EEF does use lots of whataboutism, but I think that's how his brain works.  At least he explains his reasoning.  Unlike others who have an opposite view and have no information to support it. 

But there's being objective and being too objective.  Like if your girl has sex with another guy and her excuse is  "babe, I fell and tripped and landed on his dick". Whataboutism would make this a possibility.

Because it wastes my time trying to counter your opinions based on hypotheticals and "objective" suppositions based on nothing but assumptions and a strict policy of disagreeing with anything that's based on common sense and historical context.

Then don't. Feel free to exercise the agree to disagree option.

What I said was concerning a statement of fact anyway, not an opinion issue anyway.

Just FYI, hypotheticals are a way of helping people to think of a situation in a certain context. Surely you are familiar with thought experiments.

Then don't. Feel free to exercise the agree to disagree option.

What I said was concerning a statement of fact anyway, not an opinion issue anyway.

Just FYI, hypotheticals are a way of helping people to think of a situation in a certain context. Surely you are familiar with thought experiments.

Hypotheticals and thought experiments are what people sitting around having a fun discussion do as a way of exploring possibilities.

When discussing the law and specific cases, hypotheticals are a deflection and distraction.  it might amuse you, but it muddies the water for others.  A court of law will not allow any hypotheticals or conclusions to be introduced except when questioning an expert witness.

You are no expert.

Maybe you should start a thought experiment thread for each issue rather than interjecting it into a fact-based discussion?

Maybe you should start a thought experiment thread for each issue rather than interjecting it into a fact-based discussion?

This would be a good idea.  If doing the exp, create a new title beginning with "whataboutism" as not to derail the thread, unless asking a serious question that isn't a TE.

I didn't think of that until I saw this. That explains a lot about the swamp or deep state.

Tats is the man. I check every day.

https://sinfest.xyz/

Hypotheticals and thought experiments are what people sitting around having a fun discussion do as a way of exploring possibilities.

When discussing the law and specific cases, hypotheticals are a deflection and distraction.  it might amuse you, but it muddies the water for others.  A court of law will not allow any hypotheticals or conclusions to be introduced except when questioning an expert witness.

You are no expert.

Maybe you should start a thought experiment thread for each issue rather than interjecting it into a fact-based discussion?

Hypotheticals and thought experiments are not deflections or distractions. It seems you just don't like the conclusions drawn.

This whole spat started when I made a statement that you were factually incorrect and you have responded complaining about hypotheticals so your criticism, even if fair in some other discussion is entirely irrelevant here.

Hypotheticals and thought experiments are not deflections or distractions. It seems you just don't like the conclusions drawn.

This whole spat started when I made a statement that you were factually incorrect and you have responded complaining about hypotheticals so your criticism, even if fair in some other discussion is entirely irrelevant here.

Once again, your conclusion is wrong and nothing other than opinion.

Once again, your conclusion is wrong and nothing other than opinion.

Wrong. I didn't make an opinion type statement. You do this very often, falsely call something an opinion when it isn't.