His first post insulting you was deleted, so he's trying to play innocent.
False. The post still exists as the first post in the "moderating" thread. If you think you can effectively use this post against me, I invite you to try.
He found enough evidence to believe it is fact.
False. He doesn't "believe" that it is a fact. He "knows" that it is a fact. That's the difference. Also, his "evidence" is a historian's opinion. I'm sure that Ellis crafts a well-written argument to back his own beliefs. Ren refuses to acknowledge that Ellis could possibly be biased in creating his opinions and arguments. Ren also refuses to acknowledge that the historical information Ellis uses to create his argument could be inaccurate or changed. I am not saying that Ellis is false. I repeat: I am not saying that Ellis is false. I am merely saying that Ellis might not be right. Ellis' word is not necessarily 100% fact. I repeat again, it's okay if you believe Ellis, but it's not okay if you say "Ellis is always right and you are an idiot for not believing him." Granted, Ren hasn't actually used the word "idiot," but he has implied it numerous times. (Please refer to previous post.) If you have followed the conversations between Ren and me, even in the slightest, you would realize that I'm not the suppressor. I'm the one being suppressed. In my opinion, I'm defending my "human RIGHT to discuss whatever" I want. Unless you can clearly explain why I'm different and don't have that right, I have to believe that you are continuing to show biases against me.
IYOU think YOUR belief is fact
False. I call my belief a belief, just as it is. If you don't believe me, I can quote you one of the many times I say this.
and since you are weak at debate, you throw in punches.
False. You seriously need to get off of your high horse. I have kept my arguments pertinent and directly create counterclaims to the claims that are thrown my way... because that's what an argument is. If by throw punches, you are talking about someone who includes irrelevant information for the sole reason to insulting others, you are wrong. I make sure that everything I include in my argument is relevant and justified. There's a certain duo of people here who use arguments of "piss off," "you lost the argument," and "weak at debate," but I choose not to take offense. Honestly, Paula, this argument is not going to move forward if you base your arguments off of things I didn't say. I've been forced to continue to repeat the same statements over and over and over again because you pretend I don't say certain things. Sometimes you do this directly in the following reply! How are we supposed to progress this argument if you use cheap tactics like that and continuously treat me like some sort of evil villain? Can't we work together to reach a tame and acceptable conclusion? If so, we must listen to each other to do so.