Since it’s child play to simply quote, (the software here even includes a link to the source), when I see somebody lie about something, rather than just quote, it gives the appearance of deception, not honesty.
There’a always this moment where I wish to simply show a lie to be exactly that, but this means you are entangled with a liar, and there is no payoff in showing them to be making something up.
It simply won’t matter. We know from research that a lie that enforces a belief is not countered with facts. In fact, a factual counter usually just makes somebody believe more, and adds a layer of “if it wasn’t true, then why are you trying so hard to show it’s not true?”. It’s a Catch 22, trying to correct or defend against lies people type out online. Here’s the exchange, in which he used the term “the AGW argument”, what he now refers to as “the construct”.
His response was
At which point I could tell it was a game, not an honest attempt at understanding anything, certainly not what facts would cause one to question the AGW theory.
It’s quite similar to the specious argument that AGW simply means the planet is warming. This level if idiot “science” is impossible to engage with, it’s more religion than science. It’s exactly why asking somebody to define their terms is greeted with all kinds of nonsense in return, rather than a simple clear scientific explanation.
My response in the thread was quite clear.
(more at the link)
It didn’t matter, and we see the same idiot point brought up here again. It’s why countering ignorance with facts is almost useless.