Secondhand information isn't likely to be good.
If you say that the data is not enetered correctly as argumet, go ahead and prove it, the burdon of proof is on you
Use the actual census.
it isnt second hand information
Give me the link.
its directly from
Copy and paste it please.
i gave you the link what 6 times now
So I can open it and prove it to you.
No thats an image of the link
are you handicapped?
Are you ?
That's an image of the link
not the link
Considering you need me to do everything for you
I don't know which wikipedia entry this is.
idk type it out, you are the one trying to disprove my factual claims
go ahead do it
Then I may use a different link.
Then you would argue that its false because of that.
You made the cliam it was 11^, i looked it up myself and disproved you
Why won't you share your sources?
Is it because you edit them yourself?
now you may look up hings yourself to counter my argument that shows you are a lying piece of shit
What are you hiding by not sharing your sources?
You never showed your sources
You are awfully defensive, don't you think?
you claimed it was 11%
show us that it is 11%
I am trying to use your version of the government census.
Give me the link that you were proving.
the burdon of proof lies with you if you want to arguagainst my factaul data
Why don't you want to give your supposedly correct data?
Images don't mean shit.
I already showed you the data you are just being pathetic not being able to source your own information, you said you read something on the census that said it was 11%
Show us all this proof you base the 11% claim on
Guys, look, I posted an image.
Give me the link you said was the reference.
Why can't you give your proof?
