>>16739840 (/lb)
>Again, you seek to take the argument to a place it didn't go.
Again you seek to 'prove' your statements true by prefacing them with a straw man.
Anon does not need your permission as to where debates go. You do not determine the terms. You in your self alienated mindset may believe that's how you prove one side of your split mind as correct while the other side supplies it with inverted statements to debunk, but in the digital battlefield you need to understand that the statements you receive need not go through an approval process with you before they can be uttered.
Anon's statements go where Anon wants them to go.
If you can't prove how the logic of the minds of one race of people categorically 'differs' from the logic of minds of other races, or by sex, or by class or by political affiliation, if you cannot prove how your logic somehow transcends the limits you are imputing to everyone else, then please understand unity logic remains unfazed and remains what it was before you posted any statements extending from dialectic division logic.
Can you even speak of humans without deflecting to squirrels?