>when you're having a historical argument with someone

>>3373340
just say "I AM SMARTER THAN YOU"

Fucking this man. You know what you're saying is true, but they keeo adding demands to your sources.

>>3373372
>tfw they dismiss your sources as "the ____'s books".

It's funny because you can't tell if I'm talking about woke black people or /pol/lacks.

File: 1449339248760s.jpg (7KB, 230x219px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 230x219px

>tfw I "lose" an argument because I don't have a doctorate degree in African geography, micronesion Geneology, and Feudal European crop biology

>>3373340
I have this problem when explaining football to idiots who think know football, but don't. Am I autistic?

>>3373460
>and neither does your opponent
He takes you to be the sole representative of your team and starts using you as the ultimate encyclopedia; and when you're at a loss for words, that's the end of his investigation into the topic.

I remember as a teen, trying to convince my mother of the rigor behind evolution
>le fedora lmao
When it stops being a two-way discussion and instead devolves into one-way interview, you know you've won. At that point, all they've got is argumentum ad ignorantiam.

>>3373340
How do you know they are wrong then?

>>3373492
You can know that a premise has a high % chance of being wrong given X, Y and Z; but without an example you can't say for sure that it's wrong.

>Look, I'm not gonna argue with you!
>Do what I say anyway!
Stupid fucking teachers, school IS for chumps

File: 3DF16BED-1211-43FE-8090-7D1A1A745C6C-8271-00000A69DD3A2B4F.png (6KB, 195x259px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 195x259px

>>3373492
You can have thoughts to intelligent too be expressed in words