Because apparently it’s a test to pressure someone for half an hour on a logical fallacy demanding a direct statement

atleast the pedophiles can sound reasonable to a you

It being for half an hour is YOUR problem, not mine. You could've conceded the first time i asked

but I don't think anything can make this sound reasonable to anyone

I already did

you never refuted it lmao

if its unreasonable, refute my explanation

Bro I’m waiting for you to chill and continue with the main argument

Is conceding minor errors to public easier than conceding major errors to public?

I'm not gonna do that lol

Not a sub argument based off of a fallacy I made half an hour ago

its not a sub argument Lol

i explained how its releavnt

you never addressed that explanation neither lmao

it's really not

your explanation is s h i t

I'm noticing a pattern of what you do
1. ASsert something
2. Get refuted
3. Ignore the rebuttal
4. Re assert the thing that got refuted

Okay then refute it

How is it bad?

whats the problem with it?

Or are you incapable of doing so?

If you are then why claim its bad?

Are you going to a force someone to eat something they don’t like

Just because you want to figure out if they eat

No that's false equivolance fallacy

I'm also noticing a pattern with you
1. claim strawmaning
2. lose focus on the main argument
3. get angry

Also false analogy fallacy

I'm explaining why its perfectly relevant

I explained why its relevant

You just claimed that my explanatino was bad and yet you never addressed it

If i just went around asserting that your positions were all wrong with refusing to actually refute them, would it not be disingenuous?

Of course it would

...

Bruh has something happened to you

LOL thank you for proving my point for me

Im so glad i did this

I honestly have no idea what the original debate was about

I'm so glad i thought about this the other day as a test to see who's genuine and who isn't

I’ve said I’ve made a mistake

No

You've indirectly shrugged it off