I’m sorry, this is probably my neurodivergence speaking, but that’s not evidence that Climate Town pulled from that book.

Listen, it’s not even relevant, because it’s not even the intent of your original comment. That could just be like, “Hey guys, if you think that’s crazy, you should check out this book that goes into this happening not only in Chicago but across the entire United States.” But you’re insistence that that book IS the source is just completely throwing me. Why? I guess I don’t understand why the need to exaggerate the connection between the two. They both cover the same topic, that was all the in you needed to plug that book/article.

And your reply comment is an appeal to originality and an appeal to quality. It’s fallacious and irrelevant to my point. And kind of disappointing that you’re disparaging good content to make your thing look better.