My main point is to prove my claim beyond any reasonable doubt;
For example, (news footage/video that shows) the use of a dummy would prove my claim that actors are involved in staged events (hoaxes). Is this evidence not sufficient to prove my claim? Why not?
I fail to see where your confusion is coming from.
For example, (news footage/video that shows) the use of a dummy would prove my claim that actors are involved in staged events (hoaxes). Is this evidence not sufficient to prove my claim? Why not?
I fail to see where your confusion is coming from.
Imagine you're back in school and you're on the debating team. What is the topic for which you are arguing? Is it just "actors are in staged events"?
Actors are involved in hoaxes, period. You finally agree with me?
