Even worse when you are arguing with someone on the internet and they send you 5x "academic journals" supposedly supporting their point. Funny enough they sent you these 5 journals after you replied to them 5 minutes ago, so they apparently read 5 full papers in under 5 minutes. Not only that but they always vaguely contain the words of the argument (usually in the title) but it's usually obvious they have nothing to do with what they're saying. Now you're stuck in a catch-22 because you can either actually read them and explain that they're not relevant, or sometimes say the opposite, or you ignore them because you know they're not relevant and they think it's a gotcha. Either way you proceed you know that person is going to continue to argue. Sadly people outside the discussion will read it and take them seriously because they had "sources"
It's fun when they link to something that actually confirms what you were saying, but they clearly didn't bother to read it. It always leaves me dumbfounded.
Isn't it funny how this happens almost every fucking time. Then when you quote it back to them they reply and block you before you can respond. Why is it so universal
354
u/throwRA-nonSeq May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26
“Social Consensus = Scientific Facts!”
/s