> I am trying to say that our definitions of evidence are not the same anymore.
It is just a video online. Without any other supporting factors, it stays like that. Evidence requires connection to the context, and we can't verify that.
It's literally video evidence of the Russians pretty much admitting it and you're doing your best to try say theres no way to know its real.
> I care about the truth. But I also don't like that people can't see over their own biases. (e.g. not considering that someone else than Russia could do something for their own benefit)
I care about the truth as well, but it's worth knowing that people who 'question' everything generally have an ulterior motive and don't really care about the truth. Whats the points in arguing if all the evidence is deep faked?.
Theres no proof anything you said is true, tonnes of proof the Russians blew up the damn.
Here's another video of them saying they want to blow the dam, but I'm sure you'll come up with some reason why this video could be fake too.
It's literally video evidence of the Russians pretty much admitting it and you're doing your best to try say theres no way to know its real.
> I care about the truth. But I also don't like that people can't see over their own biases. (e.g. not considering that someone else than Russia could do something for their own benefit)
I care about the truth as well, but it's worth knowing that people who 'question' everything generally have an ulterior motive and don't really care about the truth. Whats the points in arguing if all the evidence is deep faked?.
Theres no proof anything you said is true, tonnes of proof the Russians blew up the damn.
Here's another video of them saying they want to blow the dam, but I'm sure you'll come up with some reason why this video could be fake too.
https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/16660615320803614...
I'll welcome any proof that all this evidence the Russians blew up the dam is fake, but so far there is none.