Aurini the thing I'd warn you about this sort of psychology is that the dude is most likely going to come at you with some science question that you probably remember learning about in high school or college, but can't precisely explain on command without looking it up. Then he'll seize on that lack of certainty or precision as proof that you can't answer the question and whatever you're talking about was really a hoax invented by the Jews to promote sodomy.
Watch the debate between JF and Vox Day over evolution. Now Vox had been crowing all the time beforehand about how he can defeat anyone who believes in evolution in debate. So when it finally came time to debate JF he had what he thought was a trump card: he calculated that the mutation rate in mitosis wasn't sufficient to allow a species to evolve into another species on any possible timescale. The thing is, JF had counter-arguments to that. He pointed out that adaptive mutations don't occur at a steady rate, for example the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs was an instant selection favoring small animals that burrow in the ground. He also said that sexual reproduction allows for a much greater rate of adaptation than just mitosis, since each generation that reproduces sexually shakes the DNA bag around a bit and allows for faster adaptation.
A reasonable person would say "Ok those explanations make sense, or at the very least I could look it up if I'm not totally convinced. After all since I'm not a Ph.D Biologist like the guy I'm debating, I should consider that his position is likely better informed." Thing is Vox Day has a fixed disbelief in evolution, presumably informed by his religious views. He had what he thought was a crack in the scientific theory and was going to hold on to that for dear life no matter what anyone said to him because it justified his worldview. The bar JF had to reach to prove his point was always going to be out of reach. These guys also know that their beliefs sound screwy to other people, so they'll try to hide the woo with something like "Well I don't claim to know what's true, but all these little nitpicks I've found with the narrative show that the mainstream version must be false!" And they strawman all scientists as those smug little bugmen that do those "I fucking love science" videos on youtube. And they point to the reproducibility problem as if that somehow damns all scientific knowledge. You can exhaust yourself trying to debate but any evidence you bring will be considered invalid and you can't be trusted anyways since you disagree and must either be a sheeple or one of (((them))).
Watch the debate between JF and Vox Day over evolution. Now Vox had been crowing all the time beforehand about how he can defeat anyone who believes in evolution in debate. So when it finally came time to debate JF he had what he thought was a trump card: he calculated that the mutation rate in mitosis wasn't sufficient to allow a species to evolve into another species on any possible timescale. The thing is, JF had counter-arguments to that. He pointed out that adaptive mutations don't occur at a steady rate, for example the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs was an instant selection favoring small animals that burrow in the ground. He also said that sexual reproduction allows for a much greater rate of adaptation than just mitosis, since each generation that reproduces sexually shakes the DNA bag around a bit and allows for faster adaptation.
A reasonable person would say "Ok those explanations make sense, or at the very least I could look it up if I'm not totally convinced. After all since I'm not a Ph.D Biologist like the guy I'm debating, I should consider that his position is likely better informed." Thing is Vox Day has a fixed disbelief in evolution, presumably informed by his religious views. He had what he thought was a crack in the scientific theory and was going to hold on to that for dear life no matter what anyone said to him because it justified his worldview. The bar JF had to reach to prove his point was always going to be out of reach. These guys also know that their beliefs sound screwy to other people, so they'll try to hide the woo with something like "Well I don't claim to know what's true, but all these little nitpicks I've found with the narrative show that the mainstream version must be false!" And they strawman all scientists as those smug little bugmen that do those "I fucking love science" videos on youtube. And they point to the reproducibility problem as if that somehow damns all scientific knowledge. You can exhaust yourself trying to debate but any evidence you bring will be considered invalid and you can't be trusted anyways since you disagree and must either be a sheeple or one of (((them))).