It's encouraging to see an unreserved admission that what you said wasn't true; but, given that what I had to say was easily-verified evidence that what you were saying was false, it's puzzling that you would say you "have no interest whatsoever" in it. That would seem to entail that you have no interest whatsoever in whether what you were saying was true or false. Is that what you intended to admit? It does seem to be in keeping with the fact that you knew or should have known that the things you were saying were falsehoods, given that I had corrected them only 13 days earlier.

In that context, it's interesting that you mention trolling, which is precisely saying things to get a reaction without any interest in whether those things are true or false. Obviously that isn't what I was doing; these are difficult and complex topics, and I wouldn't have been able to uncover your mistakes if I wasn't dedicating significant effort to figuring out what was actually true.

I understand that your lower animal nature would like to not hear what I have to say, because it's embarrassing when I provide clear and convincing evidence that you're mistaken about something, and so you want to play some kind of chimpanzee dominance games with me. But I'm not addressing your lower nature, and I'm not interested in your dominance games. I'm assuming that there's some part of you that does care whether what you're saying is true or false—that you have a higher nature that really believes it to some extent when you recommend that people do the following:

- "accept and comprehend reality" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42482071

- study verifiable and quantitative data about CO₂ emissions, give priority to matters of physics over feelings or opinion, make at least a "minimal attempt at critical thinking", and study "the rules of physics" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42418501

- "work on how to live in this reality" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42419170

- "leaving fantasy-land to then be able to discuss, evaluate and address reality" rather than "creating a religion out of fantasies" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42419979

- "exercise critical thinking" using "the requisite scientific background or real-world experience to understand what are otherwise simple arguments rooted in physics" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42425472

- reading research papers to find "the correct scientific perspective" rather than "pushing nonsense" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42420244 (though in that case the thing you were citing wasn't a research paper and had clearly turned out to be incorrect)

- to "actually have an intelligent conversation" and "consider the entire life cycle" of solar energy https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42424685

Taking your own advice on these points would entail responding seriously to the new, easily verifiable information I am presenting you with, rather than repeating claims I have clearly disproven. Above you say you have no interest whatsoever in doing this, and additionally you are accusing me of "trolling", but presumably there is some part of you that actually does believe in those stated ideals. Hopefully it can overcome your chimpanzee side.

Nevertheless, even if you have no interest in whether the things you are saying are true or false (as you seem to be claiming), certainly there are other people who are interested in what is true, so I will continue to correct your errors when I notice them. As I said before, I would very much appreciate it if you would extend me the same courtesy.