Yes.
Which those theories are usually claiming something. Much like flat earth theories.
so far your theory on this matter hasn’t been proven. Why? Either because your initial claim that started all this, you cannot prove, or what you claimed isn’t true at all.
It's the silent majority! Another claim with zero backup.
When Rich Leadbetter says this is the game he's most looking forward to at 18:55 on the Digital Foundry video, I could swear you can hear him sniff a little in one nostril. Fulton must have delivered him some high grade Colombian.
What you tried to make clear is that you didn't make a claim by trying to change the way things are defined in order to try to avoid it being considered a claim. Pretty simple situation to grasp. It's less about pitchforks being drawn and that:
And more so things should be proven if that's how far you're going to try to pull things out of the backside.
Except that you did, you basically tried to redefine words on your own, even when told otherwise. What made it less clear is you continuously trying change what a theory is, instead of just understanding what was said to you. Had you literally not attempted to do any of that, and instead just corrected yourself, than these "pitchforks" wouldn't have been brought out. You even went so far as to tell others to prove what you said is wrong, instead, making much more easy to understand that it was a claim, not a viewpoint based off zero evidence.
So don't try to fool yourself, or anyone else, there. None of that was a refreshing viewpoint and more so something that someone just pulled out of their ass with absolutely nothing that bases it in reality. It was literally an assumption based on not one single bit of fact.
I said it before, but you are delusional. A theory is indirectly or directly a claim against what's known currently. The Earth is round, but the person who came up with the theory that the earth is flat is indeed claiming that the earth is flat. That's why that is a conspiracy theory, because nothing of what he is saying has any sort of proof whatsoever. That's how those are debunked. That is essentially what your "theory" is, nothing but a conspiracy, that is still very much a claim against what is known. Again, if you weren't making a claim, why would you tell people to prove you wrong instead? You're all over the place trying to save face here, making this drag out worse. I don't understand how you don't get why those "pitchforks" came out against you. Cool, where's your proof that helped you base this off of? Or, again, was it just an asspull because you didn't feel like believing it?
You win.
