Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • TalkRational: you owe it to yourself to at least view the end result of a forum run nearly on your own retarded principles

Topic: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World) (Read 210601 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.
  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41900
"It clearly shows how little animal diversity is left, a diversity that is shrinking daily."

Relax.

500 million years from now all that diversity will be restored. It's inevitable!

Just ask Darwin.

Or Voxrat and Pingu.
You could not be stupider. You are a parody of yourself.
Calm down. It was a joke.
Sorry to be a wet blanket, but I don't think the cataclysmic decline in biodiversity reflected in that graphic is a laughing matter.  I don't think anyone here but you does.
You misunderstood the target of my laughter. My laughter is not at the loss of biodiversity which, as you say, and I agree, is no laughing matter. 
No, I didn't misunderstand anything. I noted you making a stupid joke instead of grappling with the very serious issue of biodiversity collapsing, and your dumb ideas exacerbating that problem.
Quote
The target of my laughter is darwinists ...
Like Allan Savory?
Like Mark Shepard?

You just never get tired of stepping on that rake, do you?

"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41901
"It clearly shows how little animal diversity is left, a diversity that is shrinking daily."

Relax.

500 million years from now all that diversity will be restored. It's inevitable!

Just ask Darwin.

Or Voxrat and Pingu.
You could not be stupider. You are a parody of yourself.
Calm down. It was a joke.
Sorry to be a wet blanket, but I don't think the cataclysmic decline in biodiversity reflected in that graphic is a laughing matter.  I don't think anyone here but you does.

Depending on how many facets of fundamentalist teachings Dave actually includes in his personal belief system, I can sort of see where his 'joke' comes from. We know he's a young earth creationist, believes Noah's Flood actually happened in recent times, certainly believes the earth was made for humans, but idk if he believes humans are meant to 'use up the earth'*. as some do. If he does, from that point of view, the extinction of life except humans and their livestock would be of no concern to him, therefore amusing that other people find that pov grotesque.

*To be fair to fundies, I've only rarely seen people espouse this belief, and most of them were members of the Rapture Ready forums, and not all were in agreement.
I absolutely do not believe that humans are meant to use up the Earth. Do you think I would be doing what I'm doing on my 10 acres if I believed that?



I'm glad to hear it.

But yes, if you believed as I described, you wouldn't care about anything but feeding humans through the end times and would not care about other animals.

You must see, though, that your attitudes toward wildlife are very blasé and certainly appear deliberately ignorant and uncaring.

You never answered my question about Savory and game hunting, btw.
No my attitudes towards wildlife are very good.  Allan Savory and I like wildlife more than most people and the proof that we do is our actions to help save their habitats.  Lions and tigers don't do very well in the Sahara Desert so we'd like to try to keep the rest of Africa from becoming like the Sahara.  If we could achieve the unthinkable and actually re-green the entire Sahara - putting it back the way it was a few thousand years ago, then wildlife would be in great shape.  (Except of course the extinct species) (Which will re-evolve according to Darwin given enough time) (Time ... the Magic Potion!)

And yes, you read that right ... Savory does make money from hunting leases on his land.  Game is plentiful there because HMG attracts game.  He told about this in that documentary I linked.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41902
By the way, remember that patch of ground I told you about on my land that had almost no green stuff growing at all this Spring? 

Massive forage growth now since it has been resting about 1 month since I intensively grazed it with my flerd.  All the tall dead oxidizing stuff got trampled and is lying flat now which will serve as a moisture retaining mulch plus feed for soil organisms. 

Difference of night and day to what I did last year - brush hogged it.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41903
No my attitudes towards wildlife are very good. 
:no:
Quote
Allan Savory and I like wildlife more than most people and the proof that we do is our actions to help save their habitats.  Lions and tigers don't do very well in the Sahara Desert so we'd like to try to keep the rest of Africa from becoming like the Sahara.
Do you need us to post the images of the Sahel getting greener over the last several decades - no thanks to "HMG" ?
Quote
If we could achieve the unthinkable and actually re-green the entire Sahara - putting it back the way it was a few thousand years ago, then wildlife would be in great shape.
There is zero evidence that "we" can do that.
Quote
(Except of course the extinct species) (Which will re-evolve according to Darwin given enough time) (Time ... the Magic Potion!)
Another hilarious joke, I guess. So I suppose we're not supposed to notice your misrepresentation of what Darwin had to say.
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • borealis
  • Administrator
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41904
"It clearly shows how little animal diversity is left, a diversity that is shrinking daily."

Relax.

500 million years from now all that diversity will be restored. It's inevitable!

Just ask Darwin.

Or Voxrat and Pingu.
You could not be stupider. You are a parody of yourself.
Calm down. It was a joke.
Sorry to be a wet blanket, but I don't think the cataclysmic decline in biodiversity reflected in that graphic is a laughing matter.  I don't think anyone here but you does.

Depending on how many facets of fundamentalist teachings Dave actually includes in his personal belief system, I can sort of see where his 'joke' comes from. We know he's a young earth creationist, believes Noah's Flood actually happened in recent times, certainly believes the earth was made for humans, but idk if he believes humans are meant to 'use up the earth'*. as some do. If he does, from that point of view, the extinction of life except humans and their livestock would be of no concern to him, therefore amusing that other people find that pov grotesque.

*To be fair to fundies, I've only rarely seen people espouse this belief, and most of them were members of the Rapture Ready forums, and not all were in agreement.
I absolutely do not believe that humans are meant to use up the Earth. Do you think I would be doing what I'm doing on my 10 acres if I believed that?



I'm glad to hear it.

But yes, if you believed as I described, you wouldn't care about anything but feeding humans through the end times and would not care about other animals.

You must see, though, that your attitudes toward wildlife are very blasé and certainly appear deliberately ignorant and uncaring.

You never answered my question about Savory and game hunting, btw.
No my attitudes towards wildlife are very good.  Allan Savory and I like wildlife more than most people and the proof that we do is our actions to help save their habitats.  Lions and tigers don't do very well in the Sahara Desert so we'd like to try to keep the rest of Africa from becoming like the Sahara.  If we could achieve the unthinkable and actually re-green the entire Sahara - putting it back the way it was a few thousand years ago, then wildlife would be in great shape.  (Except of course the extinct species) (Which will re-evolve according to Darwin given enough time) (Time ... the Magic Potion!)

And yes, you read that right ... Savory does make money from hunting leases on his land.  Game is plentiful there because HMG attracts game.  He told about this in that documentary I linked.


And there you go. 'Regreening' the Sahara would destroy an entire unique biome of mammals, reptiles, insects, plants. That would be destroying a habitat.

Unless you're going to let the lions eat the cows, I don't see your solution.

It sounds a LOT like Savory's ranches lure dwindling wildlife in search of food and water from their shrinking habitats. And then he gets people to pay him to kill them. How is that helping anything but Savory?

You and Savory only talk about creating more and more grass to feed cows. That is more and more habitat unavailable to wildlife.

You, and Savory as well, by all outward measurements seem completely uncaring regarding wildlife. Otherwise you wouldn't want to add another billion cows to the planet.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41905
"It clearly shows how little animal diversity is left, a diversity that is shrinking daily."

Relax.

500 million years from now all that diversity will be restored. It's inevitable!

Just ask Darwin.

Or Voxrat and Pingu.
You could not be stupider. You are a parody of yourself.
Calm down. It was a joke.
Sorry to be a wet blanket, but I don't think the cataclysmic decline in biodiversity reflected in that graphic is a laughing matter.  I don't think anyone here but you does.

Depending on how many facets of fundamentalist teachings Dave actually includes in his personal belief system, I can sort of see where his 'joke' comes from. We know he's a young earth creationist, believes Noah's Flood actually happened in recent times, certainly believes the earth was made for humans, but idk if he believes humans are meant to 'use up the earth'*. as some do. If he does, from that point of view, the extinction of life except humans and their livestock would be of no concern to him, therefore amusing that other people find that pov grotesque.

*To be fair to fundies, I've only rarely seen people espouse this belief, and most of them were members of the Rapture Ready forums, and not all were in agreement.
I absolutely do not believe that humans are meant to use up the Earth. Do you think I would be doing what I'm doing on my 10 acres if I believed that?



I'm glad to hear it.

But yes, if you believed as I described, you wouldn't care about anything but feeding humans through the end times and would not care about other animals.

You must see, though, that your attitudes toward wildlife are very blasé and certainly appear deliberately ignorant and uncaring.

You never answered my question about Savory and game hunting, btw.
No my attitudes towards wildlife are very good.  Allan Savory and I like wildlife more than most people and the proof that we do is our actions to help save their habitats.  Lions and tigers don't do very well in the Sahara Desert so we'd like to try to keep the rest of Africa from becoming like the Sahara.  If we could achieve the unthinkable and actually re-green the entire Sahara - putting it back the way it was a few thousand years ago, then wildlife would be in great shape.  (Except of course the extinct species) (Which will re-evolve according to Darwin given enough time) (Time ... the Magic Potion!)

And yes, you read that right ... Savory does make money from hunting leases on his land.  Game is plentiful there because HMG attracts game.  He told about this in that documentary I linked.


And there you go. 'Regreening' the Sahara would destroy an entire unique biome of mammals, reptiles, insects, plants. That would be destroying a habitat.
Well I suppose.  But only in the same way that restoring an old rusty junk car is "destroying a unique artifact." 

Unless you're going to let the lions eat the cows, I don't see your solution.
Not the cows, but the WILD herbivores, yes.

It sounds a LOT like Savory's ranches lure dwindling wildlife in search of food and water from their shrinking habitats. And then he gets people to pay him to kill them. How is that helping anything but Savory?
Obviously killing endangered wildlife would be bad and would be against Zimbabwe's laws.  I'm sure Savory doesn't do that.  Are you against hunting generally?

You and Savory only talk about creating more and more grass to feed cows. That is more and more habitat unavailable to wildlife.
No.  More and more grass makes more wildlife habitat.

You, and Savory as well, by all outward measurements seem completely uncaring regarding wildlife. Otherwise you wouldn't want to add another billion cows to the planet.
No.  You don't understand what Savory does.  His work makes life better for everyone - domestic animals, wild animals, humans, soil life - everything.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41906
"It clearly shows how little animal diversity is left, a diversity that is shrinking daily."

Relax.

500 million years from now all that diversity will be restored. It's inevitable!

Just ask Darwin.

Or Voxrat and Pingu.
You could not be stupider. You are a parody of yourself.
Calm down. It was a joke.
Sorry to be a wet blanket, but I don't think the cataclysmic decline in biodiversity reflected in that graphic is a laughing matter.  I don't think anyone here but you does.

Depending on how many facets of fundamentalist teachings Dave actually includes in his personal belief system, I can sort of see where his 'joke' comes from. We know he's a young earth creationist, believes Noah's Flood actually happened in recent times, certainly believes the earth was made for humans, but idk if he believes humans are meant to 'use up the earth'*. as some do. If he does, from that point of view, the extinction of life except humans and their livestock would be of no concern to him, therefore amusing that other people find that pov grotesque.

*To be fair to fundies, I've only rarely seen people espouse this belief, and most of them were members of the Rapture Ready forums, and not all were in agreement.
I absolutely do not believe that humans are meant to use up the Earth. Do you think I would be doing what I'm doing on my 10 acres if I believed that?



I'm glad to hear it.

But yes, if you believed as I described, you wouldn't care about anything but feeding humans through the end times and would not care about other animals.

You must see, though, that your attitudes toward wildlife are very blasé and certainly appear deliberately ignorant and uncaring.

You never answered my question about Savory and game hunting, btw.
No my attitudes towards wildlife are very good.  Allan Savory and I like wildlife more than most people and the proof that we do is our actions to help save their habitats.  Lions and tigers don't do very well in the Sahara Desert so we'd like to try to keep the rest of Africa from becoming like the Sahara.  If we could achieve the unthinkable and actually re-green the entire Sahara - putting it back the way it was a few thousand years ago, then wildlife would be in great shape.  (Except of course the extinct species) (Which will re-evolve according to Darwin given enough time) (Time ... the Magic Potion!)

And yes, you read that right ... Savory does make money from hunting leases on his land.  Game is plentiful there because HMG attracts game.  He told about this in that documentary I linked.


And there you go. 'Regreening' the Sahara would destroy an entire unique biome of mammals, reptiles, insects, plants. That would be destroying a habitat.
Well I suppose.  But only in the same way that restoring an old rusty junk car is "destroying a unique artifact." 

Unless you're going to let the lions eat the cows, I don't see your solution.
Not the cows, but the WILD herbivores, yes.

It sounds a LOT like Savory's ranches lure dwindling wildlife in search of food and water from their shrinking habitats. And then he gets people to pay him to kill them. How is that helping anything but Savory?
Obviously killing endangered wildlife would be bad and would be against Zimbabwe's laws.  I'm sure Savory doesn't do that.  Are you against hunting generally?

You and Savory only talk about creating more and more grass to feed cows. That is more and more habitat unavailable to wildlife.
No.  More and more grass makes more wildlife habitat.

You, and Savory as well, by all outward measurements seem completely uncaring regarding wildlife. Otherwise you wouldn't want to add another billion cows to the planet.
No.  You don't understand what Savory does.  His work makes life better for everyone - domestic animals, wild animals, humans, soil life - everything.

Are desert-adapted plants and animals just degraded forest and grassland organisms?
While you were getting your PhD in virology, I got my PhD in truth detection. :wave:  Dave Hawkins

  • borealis
  • Administrator
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41907
http://talkrational.org/index.php/topic,188.msg189288.html#msg189288

Dave, you'd be dangerous if you ever achieved your fantasies.

You claim to appreciate wildlife and then compare desert wildlife to 'an old rusty junk car'. Desert animals and plants are uniquely and beautifully adapted to desert conditions.

Quote
A xerocole (from Greek xēros /ˈzɪroʊs/, meaning 'dry', and Latin col(ere), meaning 'to inhabit'),[2][3][4] commonly referred to as a desert animal, is an animal adapted to live in the desert. The main challenges they must overcome are lack of water and excessive heat. To conserve water, they both avoid evaporation and concentrate excretions (i.e. urine and feces).[1] Some are so adept at conserving water or obtaining it from food that they do not need to drink at all. To escape the desert heat, xerocoles tend to be either nocturnal or crepuscular, most active at dawn and dusk.

Desert plants have unique abilities. Acacia tree leaves hold 1% water during the day. At night it rises to 40%,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerocole#Morphology

Savory doesn't allow hunting of endangered wildlife? Your and his stated plan is to eliminate desert wildlife. Make them extinct. Sounds like endangerment to me.

I'm not against hunting for food. I think trophy hunting is stupid and harmful. You get complete assholes going to game preserves in Africa (and other places), shooting animals that have been lured to them, and taking bits they've cut off an animal home with them. Savory's not putting the money he gets into wildlife conservation. He's using it to pay for his upfront costs for making videos and promoting himself. It's disgusting.

Quote
No.  You don't understand what Savory does.  His work makes life better for everyone - domestic animals, wild animals, humans, soil life - everything.

I very much doubt he's improving wildlife habitat. Most animals don't live on grass. They live on leaves, insects, other animals. They den and nest in forests, burrows, caves. Cow habitat is not much good for most other animals. Bot flies, maybe. And I'd bet a few too many burrows and Savory's ranchers would be out trapping and shooting, same as they do prairie dogs in the US and Canada.

You're way too narrow-minded, Dave. You don't see past those giant blinders you wear all the time.

  • borealis
  • Administrator
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41908
Lol! You know the manna the Israelites are supposed to have eaten in the desert? There are perhaps a dozen different edible desert life forms they may have been trying to describe - tamarisk resin, scale insect honeydew, aphis secretions (still added to bread in turkey), several possible lichen species. Real journey or not, the Israelites knew what could be eaten in the desert. In its own way, the desert is bountiful.

  • Martin.au
  • Thingyologist
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41909
I'm an INTP.  Read up on them.  I suck at many things.  But I'm really good at a few things.

Bahahahahaaa. No.
Oh come on, Martin, Bluffy is pretty good at sucking. He even admits as much.

I'm just laughing that the master salesman who is good at selling things to rubes, thinks he's an intp.
It wasn't my idea that I am an INTP. I was told that by a nephew who is a health professional. And I'm not a master salesman ... just managed to become pretty good.

You're like, the exact opposite of intp.
"That which can be asserted with evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." (Dave Hawkins)

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41910
Quote
No.  More and more grass makes more wildlife habitat.

More plants = more herbivores = more carnivores, right? And that covers all the kinds of animals there are! Job done.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41911
  You don't understand what Savory does.  His work makes life better for everyone - domestic animals, wild animals, humans, soil life - everything.
Preach it, Reverend!    ::)

You don't seem to have taken in that graphic.

Here it is again:



Do you think that humans & their livestock constituting 96% of mammalian biomass is an ecologically healthy status?
Do you think that represents "working with Nature, not against Her" ?
Do you think that pushing that to a still higher proportion would be healthier?

"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41912
Dave, you'd be dangerous if you ever achieved your fantasies.
qft

Fortunately that's not going to happen, any more than the helium/zircon research program, the mouse endotoxin study, the lactose tolerance project or...
Quote
I am already in contact with the agency that handled my daughter's adoption about connecting with Syrian refugees.

Hey Dave... what happened with those "contacts"?
Have you settled any Syrian refugees into DaveTopia?
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41913
Quote
No.  More and more grass makes more wildlife habitat.

More plants = more herbivores = more carnivores, right? And that covers all the kinds of animals there are! Job done.
As Joel Salatin says "Heal the Land ... and everything else will be healed, even you, Viv!"  (Ok that was a paraphrase, I admit it)  But seriously, yes, heal the land and improve conditions for the large herbivores then all other life will be automatically taken care of.  That's how Nature works!  Too bad we weren't taught this in school.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41914
No, dave. That's how preaching works.
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41915
Dave, you'd be dangerous if you ever achieved your fantasies.
qft

Fortunately that's not going to happen, any more than the helium/zircon research program, the mouse endotoxin study, the lactose tolerance project or...
Quote
I am already in contact with the agency that handled my daughter's adoption about connecting with Syrian refugees.

Hey Dave... what happened with those "contacts"?
Have you settled any Syrian refugees into DaveTopia?
Hey Voxrat ... I've still got all my contacts.  Why would I settle any Syrian refugees before settling my Aged P's?  Why are you being a dick?

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41916
No, dave. That's how preaching works.
No.

It's how NATURE works.

You don't know much about Nature.

But you DO know about being a dick.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41917
Awww...
Poor Dave!
Pointing out the Walter Mitty nature of his plans, or the preachiness of his continuous stream of unsupported assertions is...

being a dick!

How about you deal with the questions:
Do you think that humans & their livestock constituting 96% of mammalian biomass is an ecologically healthy status?
Do you think that represents "working with Nature, not against Her" ?
Do you think that pushing that to a still higher proportion would be healthier?
  • Last Edit: June 14, 2018, 04:10:03 AM by VoxRat
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41918
Awww...
Poor Dave!
Pointing out the Walter Mitty nature of his plans, or the preachiness of his continuous stream of unsupported assertions is...
being a dick.
No, but pretending that one of my "assertions" is to settle Syrian refugees before settling my Aged P's ... IS ... being a dick. 

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41919
Awww...
Poor Dave!
Pointing out the Walter Mitty nature of his plans, or the preachiness of his continuous stream of unsupported assertions is...

being a dick!

How about you deal with the questions:

How about you go fuck yourself?

People with PhDs like you and that other person who I can't name now because it will be deemed harrasment ...

ARE the problem in our world today.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41920
Awww...
Poor Dave!
Pointing out the Walter Mitty nature of his plans, or the preachiness of his continuous stream of unsupported assertions is...
being a dick.
No, but pretending that one of my "assertions" is to settle Syrian refugees before settling my Aged P's ... IS ... being a dick. 

No, I wasn't "pretending" that was one of your assertions.
That was one of your plans.

(As is the helium/zircon project, the endotoxin study, the lactose study, and the settling of the Aged P's)
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41921
Awww...
Poor Dave!
Pointing out the Walter Mitty nature of his plans, or the preachiness of his continuous stream of unsupported assertions is...

being a dick!

How about you deal with the questions:

How about you go fuck yourself?

People with PhDs like you and that other person who I can't name now because it will be deemed harrasment ...

ARE the problem in our world today.

More preaching (of the particularly nasty sort)
And more dodging of key questions.

Same as it ever was.

Meanwhile, anyone with the most rudimentary grasp of ecology sees humans & their livestock constituting 96% of mammalian biomass as alarming, and plans to increase that proportion as wrong-headed (to understate it to the point of dark comedy).
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • Zombies!
  • These violent delights have violent ends.
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41922
Awww...
Poor Dave!
Pointing out the Walter Mitty nature of his plans, or the preachiness of his continuous stream of unsupported assertions is...

being a dick!

How about you deal with the questions:

How about you go fuck yourself?

People with PhDs like you and that other person who I can't name now because it will be deemed harrasment ...

ARE the problem in our world today.
That's it...  Keep going Dave, you only need to run off or ignore a few more people, and then you can be right all the time! :smug:
I really should call your department head and tell him or her how badly you are behaving while posing as a credentialed professional scientist.

Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41923
Awww...
Poor Dave!
Pointing out the Walter Mitty nature of his plans, or the preachiness of his continuous stream of unsupported assertions is...

being a dick!

How about you deal with the questions:

How about you go fuck yourself?

People with PhDs like you and that other person who I can't name now because it will be deemed harrasment ...

ARE the problem in our world today.

More preaching (of the particularly nasty sort)
And more dodging of key questions.

More lying on your part.  You're getting worse than CNN.

I'm answering MANY questions.  Of people who are not intent on being World Class Dicks.

You wanna be a dick?  Fine.  I can be one too.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Economics of "Saving Agriculture" (Thereby Saving the World)
Reply #41924
More lying on your part. 
Identify a single lie I've told.

See that?
You can't.

Your accusation of lying is, yes, another LIE.
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins