[zahlman]

Do you understand that https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47311879 is your comment?

Do you understand that whether or not "China are still building coal power stations" is completely and utterly irrelevant to answering the question you asked in that comment?

[moominpapa]

What have you assumed was my original position and why is that relevant when my next rhetorical question was a follow up to being asked if I had any other questions?

This is getting tedious now. The basic facts are China has something like 1200 coal powered stations and is still building more. I would not congratulate myself just because my cigarette to beer ratio was dropping if only because I was drinking alot more beer but hadn't increased my smoking by as much.

[zahlman]

> What have you assumed was my original position

I have not assumed anything. I read https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47311879, which is your comment, with the first rhetorical question.

Your implied claim is that China is not shifting away from coal.

In point of fact, they are.

You repeatedly conflate two different things.

> This is getting tedious now.

Agreed. But you were the one using an obnoxious rhetorical style while being incorrect.

[moominpapa]

The only conflation is coming from you - the first question was not rhetorical, the second was, hence the link sent with it. If asking questions is obnoxious, I suggest you get out more. I am finished explaining.