I’m giving an analogy to demonstrate why his basis for denialism is wrong. He demands a scientific explanation for why an easily observable phenomenon is the way it is in order to accept what his eyes see. It’s not enough for him to look at something and see it for what it is.
As in he needs to be told why the grass is green to accept that it is green. It’s not enough for him to just look at it and see for himself that it is, in fact, green.
Replace “grass is green” with “civil war is happening”, and you’ll understand.
…what the fuck are you talking about.
I’m giving an analogy to demonstrate why his basis for denialism is wrong. He demands a scientific explanation for why an easily observable phenomenon is the way it is in order to accept what his eyes see. It’s not enough for him to look at something and see it for what it is.
As in he needs to be told why the grass is green to accept that it is green. It’s not enough for him to just look at it and see for himself that it is, in fact, green.
Replace “grass is green” with “civil war is happening”, and you’ll understand.