zlacker

And if you actually have been playing "devil's advocate" this whole time and don't believe the interpretation of facts that you've put forth, then that is very much "arguing in bad faith." You were not up front with your beliefs or positions, you just wanted "to ask questions."

That's called "sealioning," a term you may have heard. https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/sealioning-int...

If you did not believe in good faith the statements you made, or have substance behind the questions you asked as though you believed them to be true (CGG for example), that is very much insincere.

I am not going to be dragged into an endless debate with someone who wants to play devil's advocate. There are people with actual misunderstandings and misconceptions about science that are out there that need our help to understand the world around them.

Why waste time like this if we agree on the basic points? This is not a socratic discussion, you are not Socrates, and I am not Plato. This is not a PhD defense. It is not an academic conference.

I'm here to talk about this with people who have legitimate concerns that they actually believe about the subject matter at hand.

And please, I'm sorry if I mischaracterized your position or your actions thus far, but that's what it looks like. If you had said at some point "just playing devil's advocate here!" or "I don't 100% believe this but what about this thing I saw?" then if I had seen that, I would have engaged in a completely different way, and likely disengaged much earlier.

Thanks for the interesting ideas, but I have to go study for exams, and procrastinate in ways that are better for both of our mental health.

Have a great day, and I hope this hasn't taken up as much of your mental energy as it has mine. Because it took up a lot of mine.