I would suggest that there is more than a little synesthesia occurring when you believe that text has a volume. Just saying. Also interesting that you’re reduced to more snarky bullshit. I “loudly” do something but your, less an intellectually consistent devil’s advocate schtick, that’s just good ol’ fashioned Lawyerball. Eh?
By the way, I notice that somehow you managed to reply to a post and accidentally missedthe massive, bolded, underlined, italicized citation proving that not only were you wildly wrong about a very clear post that I made, as my very first post in this thread, but your characterization of this thread is dramatically at odds with what has actually happened… and you somehow totally avoid mentioning those facts let alone actually retracting your errors.
You also somehow neglected to mention whether you have or have not opposed the half century of warning labels, or how showing potential consequences of smoking, via pictural representation, is a material difference when compared to using words to do the same thing.
But you have now tried to change the subject with an odd, and incorrect dodge. Do you, in fact, now intend to claim that eating food can not, actually, make one gain weight? That pointing out that eating food has the potential consequence of weight gain is not a 'clearly factual display of information"?
Perhaps you should return to backing up Notre’s devastating critique of how very wrong I was about the proper care and feeding of rokhs and how to deal with the elephant carcases they discard, rather than addressing the fact that both you and he have wildly mischaracterized my actual argument, and blatantly cherrypicked in order to do it, and then refused to retract your clear and proven errors, thereby casting doubt on the veracity of any other statement or analysis you have made or will make on this topic?
So… forklift to get rid of rokh-leavings?
Or are you thinking maybe a bulldozer?