I wrote some long notes which were maybe hard to answer so I gave the benefit of the doubt and pulled it back to 2 concise questions with context and this is your response..

At this point, undoubtedly, you are the one moving the goalposts Daniel; not me.

If you can’t answer basic questions and make a direct argument against the sun being the primary driver of climate change then I quite simply contend that you are beholden to a narrative that you haven’t fully explored yourself.

Have you read this book?: nostr:note1kexprper82q0wlt3qcwcxazmv5348magqm2yn7u8vfak37alxa9qc8yncc

If you haven’t then you don’t know any of the counterarguments to your position, no different to a shitcoiner arguing for their token without having done even basic research on Bitcoin.

You have to know your oppositions arguments if you’re to make a solid case for your position and this thread had demonstrated you simply can’t.

That doesn’t mean you’re wrong and I’m right, it does mean you can’t win an argument because you don’t know the other side of what you are actually arguing which means you refuse to actually engage things head-on. 

As a Bitcoiner this should be a red flag for yourself that you only have one side of the story and yet you’re here spruiking it rather than reading what your opposition says.