And he talks of others with confirmation bias. Bucks is of course immune to such, and others pointing out logical fallacies with him have an ‘agenda’ or agree with so called ‘experts’. Moral of the story is that it’s impossible to disagree with Bucks and be in good faith or credible. Anyone who disagrees thinks they’re above their station and are an ‘expert’. What we should be doing is agreeing with the sole voice of reason on any subject.
