notice that I actually answered the question before pointing out the diversionary debate tactic. You just keep repeating the "no you!" bullshit.

As for "gish gallop", he was referencing a completely different conversation, misrepresenting my position in that conversation, and using that strawman to attack my character. I simply addressed that dishonest tactic.

and finally, notice how there was never a refutation of my "ringleader" argument. Just ad hominem whataboutism.

notice that I actually answered the question before pointing out the diversionary debate tactic. You just keep repeating the "no you!" bullshit.

As for "gish gallop", he was referencing a completely different conversation, misrepresenting my position in that conversation, and using that strawman to attack my character. I simply addressed that dishonest tactic.

and finally, notice how there was never a refutation of my "ringleader" argument. Just ad hominem.

notice that I actually answered the question before pointing out the diversionary debate tactic. You just keep repeating the "no you!" bullshit.

As for "gish gallop", he was referencing a completely different conversation, misrepresenting my position in that conversation, and using that strawman to attack my character. I simply addressed that dishonest tactic.

notice that I actually answered the question before pointing out the diversionary debate tactic. You just keep repeating the "no you!" bullshit.