Coronavirus

enno99 wrote: »

Ah I see you left critical thinking out of your last post
When it was pointed out you dont really practice it

Lol. You're getting a bit desperate and pathetic at this stage.

Critical thinking doesn't mean you have to take any random idea seriously.

Critical thinking helps you identify good ideas from bad ideas.
And one of those ways is to see if the person suggesting the idea has and good reasons for suggesting the idea and seeing if they've had a history of suggesting bad ideas.

In this case, and in a lot of cases were you seem to be swallowing what you're told by youtubers, in both cases the person fails this test.

This guy in particular is basing his argument on his personal expertise and authority alone. But as you've admitted he has no expertise or authority.
We can also see that he believes some very silly and incorrect things, like with the Las Vegas theories. You also seem to buy into these theories for some reason, therefore you can't understand why rational people understand such theories are asinine childish fantasy.
That's fine though. It only serves to prove my point.

Please keep whinging about why we should trust this random youtube crackpot.

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Evidence is very good Stephen Paddock, was the only gunman. Watch the Hotel video, you can see him leave the hotel with bags and return with more bags and he brought them all to his hotel suite. There no evidence of a second shooter here. Paddock was always alone playing the slot machines at night. Nobody saw him speaking to anyone but the hotel crew. Right now it a shut tight closed case. Will only change when someone supplies new evidence here.

Enno. Cheerful recognises that the Las Vegas conspiracies are nonsense.
What should that tell you?