yes it is AI, and even considering its problems, it is very good at collecting information. besides, it is used here as the stake of which I planted as MY position. so if you s have an issue with its contents then you can take that up with me.
your very first rebuttal is an oxymoron, and can be dismissed with your own account.
your second rebuttal can be argued against the same pen. china is known to minimize their weakness with the same veracity it’s enemies would sensationalize them. that is why several sources, including internal ones are used, and the very fact that china silences communication over it and strives to stop its decimation to this day means they do not get to have a say to anyone with any sense over it.
you saying that sources changed their numbers is detrimental to your argument. which was just a repeat of your first point.
None of my rebuttals are oxymorons, so I’m not sure what you mean by that. Secondly, the fact that China disagrees with the west does not mean that the west is correct. I thoroughly debunked your assertions supporting claims by Alan Donald, who fled the scene before the square was dispersed. You aren’t using rhetoric well, and the LLM nonsense is trained on western information and thus is dominated by the propagandist view.
yes it is AI, and even considering its problems, it is very good at collecting information. besides, it is used here as the stake of which I planted as MY position. so if you s have an issue with its contents then you can take that up with me.
your very first rebuttal is an oxymoron, and can be dismissed with your own account.
your second rebuttal can be argued against the same pen. china is known to minimize their weakness with the same veracity it’s enemies would sensationalize them. that is why several sources, including internal ones are used, and the very fact that china silences communication over it and strives to stop its decimation to this day means they do not get to have a say to anyone with any sense over it.
you saying that sources changed their numbers is detrimental to your argument. which was just a repeat of your first point.
None of my rebuttals are oxymorons, so I’m not sure what you mean by that. Secondly, the fact that China disagrees with the west does not mean that the west is correct. I thoroughly debunked your assertions supporting claims by Alan Donald, who fled the scene before the square was dispersed. You aren’t using rhetoric well, and the LLM nonsense is trained on western information and thus is dominated by the propagandist view.