No, are you?

I cited four studies and articles in support of my statements last time. You ignored them all, and everything I said, and then cited a Time article, which basically supported my (measured, evidence-based) view and not your (extremist, catastrophizing) view, and a Guardian article, wherein everything is phrased so generally that one can't even tell to what extent it agrees with either of our positions.

(In case you have forgotten, your claims include, for instance, that there is a "a demonstrable and very extreme "authority gap"".)

And you call my perspective a delusion, and say I'm not referencing the real world? When I'm referencing it more heavily and you aren't responding to it?

You really cannot see how absurd this is?