Thread:TheFreddyFromThePizzaria/@comment-26062370-20151105005506/@comment-26186871-20151109010758

Debates. You can't debate over something ovjective. If we knew the intent, we wouldn't need to debate over it, the verdicts woyld be known before anyone argues thier cases! Remeber the National Bank case? If we knew the intent, we'd need not to argue, we'd know if it was correct or not, knowing the intent. Ifthe SC would exist in a time like this, it would simply give veridicts, and hothing more. No cases.

As for what he said, no. He said don't go by a tiny piece of evidence. If a tiny piece of evidence supports a thoery, and the rest, well, doesn't say anything, debunk or support it, it upholds what he said.

Well, okay then!

Claim=Ice is NOT always white.

Tiny evidence-There's a green pixel in there for a frame.

Correct! It's not ALWAYS white, there's a green spot. Good one debunking the fable!

Claim-The year is currently 2012, not 2015.

Timy evidence-A commerical airing right now is dated 2012.

Really? The ad could be outdated! Not to mention all the other sources point to it being 2015. Mission failed, skeptics.