Here is another short form video that explains clearly and quickly debate tactics used to discredit important issues. In the following are outlined:

Strawman: when someone reframes/rewrites your question to make it easier to beat, often times changing the meaning entirely to make the question seem illogical or irrational.

Appeal to Emotion: Using emotional manipulation to ilicit an emotional response instead of engaging with the argument itself.

Ad Hominem: attacking the person asking questions instead of answering the question. This is specifically to discredit the claim by attacking the person's credibility, even if the claim is valid.

False dichotomy: this is the classic "two things can be true" thing I see a LOT on this site. This one says by focusing on one item, the other item is not important and thus you are evil/wrong/or bad.

Red Herring: when someone brings up a seperate topic to derail and distract from the original topic. The classic "define a woman" tactic Kirk stans use a lot.

Remain calm. Remain rational. And disengage if they try to get an emotional rise out of you so you don't become feed for their content farms. And if you are unable, do not engage.

And record them if they record you so you can post it in full.

Phrases like "I am sorry you feel the need to ridicule people who are different than you." Or "You're not here to learn, you're here to farm content. Please leave me alone." Are good exit strategies.

The general public has long been divided into two parts; those who think that science can do anything and those who are afraid it will. ― Thomas Pynchon Mason & Dixon

Repetition: Saying the same thing over and over so people start to believe it. Example: Trump claiming over and over that the 2020 election was stolen from him, sowing seeds of doubt in his followers.

Appeal to Fear: Scaring people to make them agree or act a certain way. Example: "Without our protection, your personal data is at risk — hackers are waiting to steal your identity!"

Bandwagon: Saying “everyone is doing it, so you should too.” Example: “Run don't walk, everyone's buying this new viral lip plumper, it really works!”

Straw Man is a propaganda and argument technique where someone twists or oversimplifies another person’s argument to make it easier to attack or ridicule, then they argue against that weaker version instead of the real point. Example: Person A: “We should have limits on social media to reduce misinformation” Person B: “Person A wants to control everything we say online and take away free speech!”

Glittering Generalities: Using fancy words that sound good but don’t explain much. Example: Saying a product is “revolutionary” or “life-changing” without details or proof.

Testimonial: Using a famous person to say something is true or good. Example: A celebrity endorsing a skincare brand.

Plain Folks: Pretending to be just like regular people to gain trust. Example: Kylie Jenner filming makeup videos in her car using a handheld camera so her video seems more spontaneous and less professional, therefore making her seem more "every day" and therefore accessible.

Card Stacking/Cherry Picking: Only sharing facts that support one side and hiding the rest. Example: A health article might use one study to show a certain food has health benefits, but ignores other studies that show potential risks or no effect.

Transfer: Using a popular symbol or idea to make something seem better. Example: A car commercial shows the vehicle driving past iconic landmarks or uses national flags and patriotic music, making viewers associate the car with pride and national identity, even though the car itself has nothing directly to do with those symbols.

If you spend all your time fighting strawmen, or watching others fight strawmen, you will close yourself off to useful ideas — because you’ve only ever seen them represented poorly. In this way, blogs that post a lot of of underwater screenshots are bad actors trying to limit their readers’ intellectual breadth. “Look, my enemies are fools. I’m the only one you can trust.”