The image is, if you read left to right and top to bottom, moving backwards in time.
I’m not asking why things got to the point they are at today. I’m asking how someone can just populate an image about the ocean hundreds of years ago off of pure vibes.
There is no science behind just adding more animals to increase the fauna/flora density by entirely subjective amounts here. And I can say that it isn’t just meant to show an increase because specific years are used, as well as 3 data ponts, so the density of animals in question is the point.
The wish-fulfillment, because we’re moving back in time, is that the ocean was that full of life all those years ago. Unless backed by evidence. Which no one has presented so far.
So you feel good about downvoting someone for rightfully pointing out a lack of evidence, then sending a link to an entire book review which might or might not even show evidence of the thing I was asking for?
Dude, you said show “proof” and he showed proof. Dunno what you are complaining about. How was he supposed to prove anything without linking to an external source?
Burden of proof is on the person who posted, so certainly not you. But they’re quiet and you’re out here telling me to research why the meme is correct.
That amounts to saying you don’t know how to prove it, and believe it on pure subjective opinion. Which makes whatever you link idiotic since it might not even prove what you’re trying to say.
Because you asked for it? Someone posted a dumb meme and didn’t cite it with studies and now you are mad. You do have some burden since you are the one who started the discussion on proof in the first place. If you can’t even be bothered to look at the proof they bring, its not their problem.
The image is, if you read left to right and top to bottom, moving backwards in time.
I’m not asking why things got to the point they are at today. I’m asking how someone can just populate an image about the ocean hundreds of years ago off of pure vibes.
There is no science behind just adding more animals to increase the fauna/flora density by entirely subjective amounts here. And I can say that it isn’t just meant to show an increase because specific years are used, as well as 3 data ponts, so the density of animals in question is the point.
The wish-fulfillment, because we’re moving back in time, is that the ocean was that full of life all those years ago. Unless backed by evidence. Which no one has presented so far.
No
So you feel good about downvoting someone for rightfully pointing out a lack of evidence, then sending a link to an entire book review which might or might not even show evidence of the thing I was asking for?
LMFAO.
Dude, you said show “proof” and he showed proof. Dunno what you are complaining about. How was he supposed to prove anything without linking to an external source?
I didnt downvote you. I’m not going to do research for you. Linking a book review should be enough to prove it wasn’t pulled out of this air.
Burden of proof is on the person who posted, so certainly not you. But they’re quiet and you’re out here telling me to research why the meme is correct.
That amounts to saying you don’t know how to prove it, and believe it on pure subjective opinion. Which makes whatever you link idiotic since it might not even prove what you’re trying to say.
The review goes over some of the methodology.
I’m not saying that.
Edit: if you’re saying it’s based on nothing then I expect you to have looked into it, yes
Why should I, as the person receiving a meme, research why it is based on fact and not fiction?
That’s not how the burden of proof works.
Do memes need burden of proof?
Any media with years, density, “shifting baseline syndrome” is not a meme, it’s an infograph disguised as a meme.
So yes, your “meme” requires proof. And you’re a propagandist idiot if you think otherwise.
Because you asked for it? Someone posted a dumb meme and didn’t cite it with studies and now you are mad. You do have some burden since you are the one who started the discussion on proof in the first place. If you can’t even be bothered to look at the proof they bring, its not their problem.