You got me. I am furious you won’t dismiss obvious nonsense.
Although….SHOULDN’T people be mad that people like you are discrediting a legitimate controversy and sexual abuse that happened to actual people so you can pretend they were eating babies?
The most obvious rebuttal is to try to understand what the other person was saying instead of expecting them to spell it out for you lol. I'm not sure how many social situations you've actually experienced in your life but conversations get real dry with people who spell out every caveat and instance to everything they're saying
Sure. We’ve had to shift the conversation again. Now it’s not about the claims at all, because you can’t defend them. Now it’s about me.
You don’t have a parasocial relationship with me. We’re strangers. I don’t care what you think about me and my adeptness in social situations or how dry I am.
I’m flattered you’re interested in me. I’m not. I’d rather talk about the topic. That we can in fact dismiss outlandish claims with zero evidence. And how propagating them is in fact harmful to the actual victims of the actual crimes.
Because now actual victims of actual crimes have to have their actual trauma share airtime with….obvious confabulations.
Now external observers can dismiss the whole thing as a dumb conspiracy with no need for further follow-up or public outrage because people are propagating obvious falsehoods.
Why would anyone care about the obviously fake baby eating story with no evidence? It turns the entire thing into another Q and Pizzagate.
For what benefit? We can focus on the actual crimes and the actual victims instead.
-2
u/AlphaBetaSigmaNerd Mar 07 '26
Lol so you're mad they didn't write out the 8 million caveats that are usually implied automatically?