The thing is, I don't think that he's trolling deliberately. He thinks he's cunningly talking us government shills into corners where he can reveal our inconsistencies.
Unfortunately, due to his lack of understanding of the subject he's effectively trolling.
I don't normally like to point out to anyone that they don't understand what they are talking about. I think that's a weak form of ad-hom. I prefer to show rather than tell. But in this case lees has proven impervious to being shown anything.
I suspect the intensification of insult and untruths are due to the proximity of the point you now realize is about to arrive. Any kind of comment from you must be taken in the context of what you previously wrote about me - a blatant lie, no other word for it. I haven't had an acknowledgment or withdrawal, or even an attempt to back up your ridiculous claims about what I - according to you - put forward in the 9/11 thread. How about an acknowledgment that it was a fabrication? An apology even?
There's a reason for getting you to explain how you think these things work - having spent enough time 'debating' with you and your ilk, it's clear that the only way to avoid your wriggling off the hook is to get you to say things categorically, then we can all refer back to them.
Now, let's have a word - in layman's terms - on how clouds form. No links, just in your own words. If you don't then I will, but you'll be asked to verify and approve, so you may as well do it yourself. Then there'll be no argument. If you really believe I don't understand the physics we're discussing then why not throw in a red herring or two - I'd never know, would I?
I think Ross would be the perfect man for the job.