OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
It is up to the person making the claim to provide the evidence, that's how this works. You arguing to the contrary doesn't change that.Its not up to me to provide evidence.
I'm saying that the three experts that participate here, none of which have a vested interest in promoting flushes, aren't a fan of them.You are saying their is no evidence to support flushes because 3 professionals agree with you.
They are of course in the business of making money from flushes Adam, are you not considering that aspect of it?What about the professionals who are pro flush and manufacture the chemicals have you considered them.
First off, you haven't quoted any formulators from any of the companies selling flushes. Secondly, yes, we do usually seek-out unbiased sources to substantiate claims made by folks with vested interests because of the inherent bias present with somebody having something to gain.You can just deny them because you only want to make a point.
Adam, I've learned a ton on this forum over the years. I've provided a counter to your claim that flushes are beneficial, based on the expertise of an unbiased formulator. You've dismissed this because:You don't wish to learn anything because you have found you feel comfortable with 3 professional answers that support your point. Surely, you have proved you have critical thinking skills but still you cant comprehend that aspect of it.
1. You sell flushes
2. You feel that only those that manufacture and sell flushes are qualified to comment on them
That's not the foundation for objective discourse.
You are demanding that the person who is asking for evidence to support a claim, seek-out that evidence on their own accord, rather than the one who made said claim. That's not how debate works. Your argument betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of your own position, willfully ignoring that you are not an objective participant, hence the claim being made in the first place and the fallacious appeal to authority that only other biased parties, who have monetary interest in the positive reception of these products, are credible.
If you can't see the issue with this approach, then this has never really been a conversation, it's been a demand by a biased party that others put in the work to debase their bias, and nobody on here is going to do that, so it has always been a lost cause.
My critical thinking skills and comprehension are just fine, I'm many things Adam, but stupid isn't one of them.
Last edited: