We cannot continue this if you cannot even assess the value of your own claims. If I say "The United States of America will eventually obliterate Ireland" and you say "Prove it" using your logic I can say "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" which in turn means "We cannot read the future therefore I don't have to prove intent or likelihood."
Just horrible logic.
If you cannot understand what is wrong with this statement right here don't bother anymore. Your fanaticism coupled with poor thought processing is just not going to hold. You've not shown for anything you've said despite being given counter-arguments and counter-proof.
Lol, wow, that horse goes really high, doesn't it?
And no, you're misapplying the logic. You can point to historical data that is relatively comparable, not only citing America's own diplomatic history, but also that of situations that correlate with the relationship of the US and Ireland and make a strong case.
Much in the same way I can make statements about the business techniques ArenaNet is using to make it perfectly acceptable to offer another 'step up' from the Molten Mining Pick: a pick that is not only infinite, but also offers up crafting mats with scarce sources.
The concepts of the "foot-in-the-door" and the Overton Window are well documented, the former as an acceptable form of business practice and the other as a way of shaping thought and acceptance.
You don't need definitive proof to make a strong argument. It's like saying we have no smoking gun that EA knew that BF4 wasn't ready for launch and pushed it forward because "profit." It could have been DICE who lied. Or DICE's range of testing was just that limited. What's your take on that situation, with no smoking gun?
And you still haven't given a good reason for your counter-claim of creating a gem store item to solve your "market control" argument over a free, in-game form of content. I doubt you have one. And at this point, I'm probably going to ignore you because you really, really suck at arguments.