If that is what you got, what you took away, from all of my well documented citations that i didn't write but coherently pieced together for you to read (but you are admittedly too dense/obtuse to bother) then i obviously can't help you
Yet you wildly proclaim that i am the one who can't think critically about "things"
Things being that tl;dr wall of text, others text, from rather credible sources i may add, that you didn't or perhaps more importantly couldn't read.
But I am the one who can't think critically despite you saying less than nothing, not one thing, not one actual criticism about anything that i actually said, or perhaps more importantly the mounds of evidence that i cited as a reference for you.
But I am the waste of time? The one who is being dishonest and not using his brain?
At this point you should have just said "NO" because we both know that is more honest and a better attempt at cognitive discourse/expression than anything you have provided for your rebuttal.
or whatever that sad little reply was
I can tell that you were not a science major in college.......because otherwise you might understand that simply not accepting another persons opinion isn't an integral part of the peer review process.
It simply isn't any part of anything for that matter. It just shows you are lazy.
It just makes you look dim and dishonest, but i do appreciate you adding yourself to the meat head, blow hard, total waste of time list......that was the real troll post part i give you credit for
Save us both some time and just pretend to ignore my post next time
Say you you have feelings about poverty and facts don't matter