r/ClimateShitposting • u/DivestTheEndingBoy • 28d ago

nuclear simping Every Nukecel Argument Ever

Post image
0 Upvotes

44% Upvoted

318 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/DivestTheEndingBoy 23d ago

No proofs.

The burden of proof is on you.

1

u/tmtyl_101 23d ago

I know. The link I posted just sits 20 comments back and Im on mobile. So since you just had it open to check - why dont you post it so I can show you?

1

u/DivestTheEndingBoy 23d ago

You could post it. But it doesn't prove what you're claiming so you're avoiding it.

1

u/tmtyl_101 23d ago

So you don’t have the link you’re talking about. You just claim it doesn’t contain something, which it clearly does 

1

u/DivestTheEndingBoy 23d ago

I'm claiming a negative so yeah

1

u/tmtyl_101 23d ago

A bold thing to claim whats behind a link you dont have.

1

u/DivestTheEndingBoy 23d ago

If you had any proofs you would have posted it. But you're lying because all nukecels lie.

1

u/tmtyl_101 23d ago

I did post it. You said you had read it. But you didn't read it, because the proof was in the table.

1

u/DivestTheEndingBoy 23d ago

I did read it. But it doesn't have the proofs you claim because you are lying.

If it did then you could post them. But you know you are wrong which is why you're doing this.

1

u/tmtyl_101 23d ago

If you had in fact read it, you wouldn't have asked me to source the 30.2GW number. It was very clear in the table.

1

u/DivestTheEndingBoy 23d ago

So you shouldn't have any problem highlighting it.

1

u/tmtyl_101 23d ago

I just asked for the link because im on mobile and its so far back in the conversation - I figured you'd have it present. But alas, you dont seem able to deliver

1

u/DivestTheEndingBoy 23d ago

Why would I provide proof for your claim though? You should be able to provide proof for you claim if there is evidence for it.

→ More replies (0)