| > That's a false equivalency and doesn't apply to a very well researched and presented mini documentary. If that were the case it wouldn't have received over 62000 likes, so don't insult people's intelligence with your pseudo intellectual 'critique' by making hand wavy arguments without pointing out anything specific. And "What The Bleep Do We Know" made tens of millions of dollars (which is worth way more then 62k likes, but instead millions of people paying to watch it). It's still a load of horse crap. Andrew Wakefield's documentary on how vaccines cause autism also pulled in 10's of millions with a lot of people believing it, and used similar editing techniques. 62k likes on youtube is not some high barrier of truth to clutch your pearls about. Go look at the like count of flat earth videos for another example. > Wow you don't like the editing, could you be more shallow and desperate in your defence of the ccp's genocide? The video is excellent in its approach to deliver an important topic in an entertaining and engaging manner, that's why it has successfully reached a greater audience. Your 'criticism' is a joke. I'm pointing out that it's using well known techniques to make people seem like they're saying the opposite of what they're actually saying, while infusing the whole argument with emotional impact unrelated to what's being said. As I said originally, the OP would be better off not using a documentary that doesn't use techniques known for telling lies via editing. |
That's again a terrible comparison. How much something made is not the same as a video on a public platform open to criticism from anyone who is willing to offer criticism in an open comment section. Deniers like yourself can't provide any argument which would hold up to scrutiny that's why you here making hand wavy allegation without engaging anything in specific.
>62k likes on youtube is not some high barrier of truth to clutch your pearls about. Go look at the like count of flat earth videos for another example.
Compare the ratings on such videos and the comments, it's not even remotely on the same level. Your comparisons are dishonest and reek of desperation. You are not addressing the arguments in the video, because you can't, that's why you resort to deceptive rhetoric.
>I'm pointing out that it's using well known techniques to make people seem like they're saying the opposite of what they're actually saying, while infusing the whole argument with emotional impact unrelated to what's being said.
Nonsense. You are again making vague allegations without specifying anything in particular. Your deceptive rhetoric is ineffective.
>As I said originally, the OP would be better off not using a documentary that doesn't use techniques known for telling lies via editing.
As I said originally, you would be better of not trying to defend the ccp's genocide with deceptive vague, hand wavy rhetoric thinking that people are too stupid to see through your dishonest talking points.