I can't believe that you think a billionaire would pay to have fake hair that looked like his. It may be creatively combed and styled but I think its his. If I'm wrong, then I won't feel badly about it. OK so your theory is that Trump lost all his hair and went to the hair store and that was all he could afford? I can't say it makes a difference with me, but what evidence do you have that his hair is fake and if you had it why would you care. If Hillary had patches with weaves, would you care?
How pathetic is Dirac, resorting to lies again. First of all, you will never see me claim Bigfoot is real but I might claim based on the evidence it may be real or even likely real. I know that like UFOs, people have been conditioned to disbelieve anything and mock any evidence. That certainly isn't a scientific attitude but it is a group think attitude and Dirac is all in with group think. The difference is that I have researched the evidence and not just listened to people that claim it isn't real without any knowledge at all, like Dirac. I have even gone looking in places where it was reported because the worst that would happen is that I would have a nice camping vacation. Well I suppose the worst would be being grabbed by my ankles and slammed on the ground by a Bigfoot but I was willing to take that risk in the name of curiosity and science. Second, I have never said that AGW isn't real. I have only claimed that his ilk has exaggerated the threat to push a very destructive political agenda.
I don't typically talk about Bigfoot because I understand most people aren't interested in it at all and haven't bothered to research it. What would be the point? Dirac's point was a pathetic attempt at gotcha.