Comments by "No Name" (@NoName-hg6cc) on "Poll for UK newspaper finds large numbers want another Brexit vote" video.

@jameselder720 Ahahahahahaha no, deindustrialization was happening already and would have hit harsher if it wasn't for the EU, a big market that propped uk dying economy Ps: by the way, North oil is Scotland's
1
@jameselder720 Not as much as "EU contributed to british deindustrialization". What proofs do you have? I never said you said something, I just pointed out
1
@jameselder720 You cannot ask question without showing proofs
1
@jameselder720 And until your statements is backed by proof, you have no right to pose questions
1
@jameselder720 By your logic you are the one wrong, since you don't have "bIg EvIDeNCe" and you are the first one to ask proofs, despite presenting none You really don't get what is an argument, do you?
1
@jameselder720 I understand the rules of a debate, the first one being before asking for proofs make sure you showed your own. Not doing so it's hypocrisy. Therefore, you should have showed evidence before asking any. But, as I said, you don't know the rules of a discussion
1
@jameselder720 You don't understand how discussion works. When you claim something you have to provide proofs, otherwise you cannot ask others. You didn't provide anything
1
@jameselder720 Sorry, but the only making up rules it's you. It's not a rule in any discussion. As I pointed out, by following your rule the first one claiming ridiculous things will always get away without need to prove them. You have to provide proofs first
1
@jameselder720 I'm not making up anything, just stating the rule of any discussion, let'ss see if you are able to understand them 1) Persona A make statements and bring proofs 2) Person B make statements and brings proofs 3) There is a debate on the statistic and numbers Now, how you made the conversation go: 1) you made a statement, without showing any backing 2) I made another statement 3) you showed no proof whatsoever but dare ask me proof, which is not allowed Now, am I talking to a person or playing chess with a pigeon? You made a big statement first, you ought to show evidence
1
@jameselder720 "2) Person B questions Person A's statement and (if they wish) makes a counter-statement of their own. 3) Person A answers Person B's questions and (if they wish) questions Person B's counter-statement and makes a further counter-statement of their own." that's something you made up. I could make any statement, no matter how ludicrous, then ask you to prove yours first. That's not how it works, a statement like that require proofs backing it up, but you didn't. You clearly don't know how discussion work, so as I said, it's playing chess with a pigeon, Come back after you've learned, kiddo, or when you want to learn from yours better (me)
1
@jameselder720 LOL, quite self centered and arrogant, are you? I didn't make anything up, I'm going by the rules of discussion that YOU don't know or don't want to follow, hypocritically accusing others of doing so....As I pointed out Again, come back when you are willing to have a debate by the book, not by your weird rules. Ta-tah
1
@jameselder720 LMAO, you are willing to discuss only by your made up, hypocrite rules, according to which you can state whatever pa pass in your mind without further proofs requiring, which is not the way to discuss things
1
@jameselder720 As I said, there are rules which you should try to understand. There is nothing dishonest in trying to prevent an hypocrite to run and ruin a debate
1
@jameselder720 Yes, you abide by the rules you made up, but everyone else prefers to stand by the classic rules of the discussion and not something you made up
1
@jameselder720 I didn't make anything up, it's the rules of every discussion. Either you get it or you don't, but they won't chage for you
1
@jameselder720 You did make them up, as I pointed out( something you failed to do). The rules of discussion are the one I wrote and explained, the ones you refuse to accept. As I said: ta-tah until you accept the Truth and the rules for a meaningful discussion
1
@jameselder720 Yes, you did. You keep repeating the same bs again and again. Foe the last time: goodbye until you learn the TRUE rules. Ps: if you crave the last word that bad I'll let you have it
1
@jameselder720 Okay, one last time, I have to point it out how I decided to give an hypocrite child, who cannot understand the difference between The Rules of discussion and the rules he made up, a shallow "victory" . But feel free to enjoy this "great victory", boast if it at the kindergarten, I'm sure the other kids will be impressed Now it's over
1
@edwardharris5301 If you don't show proofs of your claims, yes. And you people showed nothing
1
@stevep9221 You joined EU, which has existed since 1957. But ignorance is to be expected by people who don't know Nazi ussk crime syndicate was born in 1801
1
@stevep9221 You did, EU was born in 1957, not 1993 but again ignorance is to be expected by people who don't know Nazi ussk crime syndicate was born in 1801 instead of 1707
1