I've investigated ponzis for several years - why do I need to investigate any further?
/ultrafacepalm
You don't understand the sentence, or you think you need to re-learn the same thing every time a new textbook comes out?
Oh yes, I understand the sentence very well, thank you for asking.
Are you going to teach me a lesson with
another misleading example?
I just realised you just did! Wow, you are getting good at misleading people.
You used the
"re-learn ... textbook" as a misleading example, again.
What does
learning has anything to do with
proving? "To Learn" is not the same as "to prove". Apologies for being the bearer of bad news for your argument. Analogies like that are misleading.
I didn't say you need to
learn again what a ponzi is, I said you need to
prove it before throwing accusations. And, as far as I know, you can't re-prove something without proving it first. And sorry, proving A doesn't prove B. If you are too lazy to do your homework is not my fault.
Also, saying something over and over again doesn't make it true. Keep it in mind before continue calling someone a liar or something a scam. It is more effective to back up your arguments with evidences than repeating it until people believes it.