So let's just look at ONE example where you didn't "do some fact checking before you go throwing that arrogance around again". Specifically, this:
...greedy drivers are bad drivers and cause more traffic accidents.
Since you always check your facts, I want you to state exactly what facts you have that support this assertion. Or you can admit that this is your unsupported opinion. Up to you.
Let me tell you something buster, my patience is gone with you. Do you right down and keep a record of every source of information that you keep stored in your brain. You expect me to go back 30 years and remember sources.
I've added back in the specific question I asked, about the specific statement you made.....I wonder why you didn't include that in your quoting?
Nope. I don't keep a record of where I heard or learned everything I know. But what I DO do, is make damn sure that when I decide to go on record with a very specific statement - such as "greedy drivers are bad drivers and cause more traffic accidents
" - I pause, and see if my memory was correct, by - oh, I don't know - checking to see if there actually WAS any fact behind that statement.
But sure - no problem. You can't at present recall where you got that information from. What matters more, perhaps, is what you are going to do about it now.
Are you going to go off, look it up, and return with some evidence to support your statement?
Are you going to go off, look it up, find NO evidence to support the statement, and then withdraw that statement?
Or are you going to ignore the issue, claim its not important, and move on to your next unsubstantiated assertion?
What pisses me off the most is I have given sources; have you checked any of them? I'm not giving them to you guys anymore. They are back there go find them yourself.
Oh yes. I read the first source that you gave, and explained in great detail why it was not a credible source. I explained how it did not provide any evidence for the statements you made, and asked you some specific questions about how you selected that as your first piece of supporting evidence.
Thus far, you have NOT commented on my concerns about the source, and you have NOT answered my questions about how far you investigated that source before recommending it to us.
Given those two facts, can you explain to me why I should read any further sources that you listed, since your first one has left me with no confidence that they will be accurate, or even relevant?