Because you can say something doesn’t mean you should. Ad hominem attacks (by anyone) do nothing to move discourse forward. Ultimately, I believe what Lewis Carroll wrote in “Through the Looking Glass”:
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’
’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.” (Lewis)
Projecting power, “owning” people is the goal-that’s all. (Havel)
Facts are facts and they’re easily checked. If you read the piece (I doubt it), are you saying the battery recycling center in SC is imaginary? (that’s just one of many examples) But, you don’t want any info that upsets your apple cart. Sad.
You argue like a middle-schooler. “Here’s what I think.” then later “But, I rally believe xyz”. Right down to the childish name calling.
Your inclusion about bridges in London suggest no such thing. If you really think something say it. Easy-peasy. Hope that helped.