Lesta Nediam LNC2016-03-31 1155 +Freddie Sparks

Lesta Nediam LNC2016-03-31 1155 +Freddie Sparks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nuYfLMnbbk&google_comment_id=z12rjxeyxxfmvtri004cj1qrwym0idzwjtg0k
https://pastebin.com/mPACH5TR
__


+Freddie Sparks __ You are so predictable. Anthony B. asserts that "Stefan Molyneux" and "Jeff C" are the same person. I assert that the woman interviewed herself. Two people are making (wild?) claims - *your reaction to them should be consistent if you aren't playing games.*






When we ask Anthony B. to substantiate his claim all he does is say that we have to "trust" him. If I said "she interviewed herself - trust me" I have a feeling you wouldn't be okay with it. *So why are you okay when Anthony B does it?*







However - unlike Anthony B - I am not demanding that you "trust" me. Instead I have a number of things to point out. For example I direct people's attention to 1) the black object in her hand (which you say could be a lunchbox - and you say you aren't playing games?); 2) the kid's furtive glances; 3) the consistent/automated nature of the camera pans; 4) the audio edit which suggests subsequent access to the woman; 5) the fact we never hear or see an interviewer *and so on and so forth.*







And I haven't even had a chance *to outline the logic that ties all of that together to conclude it was a self interview.* But when we ask Anthony B to substantiate his claim he can give nothing more than "they are the same person - trust me I'm an audio engineer - I have some secret PDF but I won't ever show it".







So I have to wonder about you. *How are you not just playing games?* How can you approach two (wild?) claims but give a free pass to one while taking exception to the other? >> You disagree with both claims after all. <<







The claim I'm making about the self interview is trivial compared to Anthony B. There is also nothing that necessarily proves there had to be an interviewer yet "Stefan Molyneux" sounds nothing like "Jeff C". Even if I were wrong my claim about a self interview makes far more sense to make than a claim about "Stefan M"/"Jeff C".







So if you aren't just playing games how can you not also be grilling Anthony B? You have even chosen to hassle me about the self interview while on a video that focuses on a claim made by Anthony B! If you are on my case about sufficient proof then *why aren't you also on Anthony B's case about sufficient proof?*







*It requires minimal effort to ask questions so why aren't you also asking Anthony B. questions?* There is a simple explanation and it's the reason no progress with you is being made or is even possible.







You are behaving like someone with an *oppositional defiance disorder.* You don't actually care about the claim I'm making - *you just want to argue against me.* If you were here for the right reasons you would have used a similar approach with Anthony B as you have toward me. But you haven't.







I have given many reasons to explore the selfie stick idea but you simply shoot everything down. I have to hassle you just to get simple answers out of you. It takes no effort or intellect to auto-deny and auto-reject everything as you're doing.







*So how are you not a timewaster playing games?* Of course you are. You had an opportunity to discuss things with me but have squandered that opportunity. *I am under no obligation to entertain timewasters who are dragging their heels every step of the way because they have an oppositional defiance disorder.*







Go hassle Anthony B about his claim to prove you are honest and not just biased against me. The selfie stick or its controller is in her hand *and there is a simple way to know it* but you are someone playing a game where you deny everything I am saying. You are disingenuous. I have given you ample opportunity to cooperate but you refuse.



__

Some witnesses:

+nationalparksign , +cabadejo , +Terran Downvale