Him: Sorry, just re reading the chain and still seeing that you avoid every point i bring up to you and that every “point” you have can easily be flipped the other way for sake of argument. You’re literally saying that you’d rather believe raw journalists rather than established journalists. Aint that the problem with the internet?
Me: Wait, I'm sorry. I don't understand what you just said. So if I watch a raw video, and CNN tells me that it didn't happen, I should believe CNN instead of my own eyes? You know that's what abusive husbands say, right? If the video tells me one thing, and CNN tells me something else, I'm not going to believe CNN, I'm going to call them out for lying because I can literally see them lying.
Him: did you really just go there dude? C’mon...there is a reason why we have the sources in front of us. Im sure you’d quote fox news with no problem But also, your argument is hear say but then you argue nothing we say is true because its hear say but its not hear say when you want it to be and since it is all hear say, thats exactly why it wont stand up in court. Are you really trying to tell me people cant edit videos Lets believe jo schmo before journaliss that have spent decades building their reputations. Lets just put you at QB for the jets because i saw a video of you throwing 80 yards. For someone in tech, you really underestimate what the avg person can do with basic technology