Ok, I'll spell it out for you. Again.
#36: "I bet those people complaining just dont believe in climate change"
If anything, this person was trying to portray those "whiny bitches" as part of a specific ideology.
So I said: "Definitely not all of them
Probably not even a large amount of them
They're just big socialists"
I say this because a large amount of the people complaining about this will be socialists, not just climate deniers. I did NOT say that everyone complaining about him will be a socialist, which should be pretty obvious considering this line - "Probably not even a large amount of them (climate deniers)" - where I am acknowledging that a proportion of the people complaining WILL be climate change deniers. Therefore I cannot also be saying that they will all be socialists.
You: "Yeah it's all the leftist that are against the climate innit, 200IQ Brit"
You assume that I'm saying that socialists are climate deniers. Obviously not the case. You fuck up on your first reply. Hence why I keep saying "stop trying to recover", because you've been digging the
hole you're in even deeper.
Fast forward to #124, because for the next several replies you're just saying the same thing.
"He is already giving the money away, the fact that people complain about WHAT he gives it away to has absolutely nothing to do with socialism."
I'm not talking about people complaining that he gave away the money to fighting climate change. I am talking about people that are complaining about the sum of money he has NOT given. Which if you read the rest of the thread with the person I was actually trying to talk to, you would understand. But since you're so convinced that I'm still talking about climate deniers, because your previous misunderstanding is still stuck in your head, you still don't get it.
And this continues on for the rest of that reply.
"I also somewhat SERIOUSLY doubt that the majority of people critiquing him for funding efforts to combat climate change aren't climate change deniers."
But I am not talking about people that are critiquing him for funding efforts to combat climate change. I am talking about people that think he isn't committing enough funding.
And this is why I wrote #129. Not because I'm unable to argue back to you, but because you can't fucking read and have been arguing the wrong point this entire time.
So I will leave you with some parting advice. Being a smug, sarcastic cunt does not make you look clever. If anything, it's just made you look like a fool.
And yes, this was quite long, because I was trying to make it as clear as possible to you. I hope you understand now.