Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 19 of 29 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 285 of 422
  1. #271
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    4,843
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    I never said you were an anti-vaxxer. I said you were the anti-vaxxer of Global Warming. Feel free to google what an analogy is (and also google strawman while you're at it, since you are using that term incorrectly as well).


    I may indeed have a future in this field, unfortunately due to your ignorance, you have no future in any scientific field.
    Just because I question prevailing opinion does not mean that I am wrong. It simply means that I require more information than someone like you does. I have done quite a bit of research into the areas that you disagree with me on and our disagreement is fine with me. I am not going to include personal insults, which appear to be your "go to" when you cannot persuade someone that they are wrong.
    And, by the way, a strawman argument is one that is thrown in to change the subject. You appear to have nothing else to resort to.

  2. #272
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    56,698
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    I am not an anti-vaxxer. I simply disagree with the opinions that people like you promote. Again, nice strawman though. You may have a future in this field.
    He wasn't saying you were literally an anti-vaxxer. It was an apt analogy.

  3. #273
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    37,932
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    No ignorance at all. I simply believe in natural cycles as your links provide.
    You disagree with my opinion and that is just fine. You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. We disagree and likely will not agree unless and until something reasonable is proposed to slow the natural cycles down. I have seen nothing resembling a reasonable response.
    You actually disagree with those links because all of those links say the current temperature increase is due to man's effects.

    We disagree. You also disagree with the experts. But I can see you are not going to change your mind on this (truly the hallmark of someone interested in the truth!).

  4. #274
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    4,843
    Strawman, from wikipedia:\
    A straw man (sometimes written as strawman) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy of having the impression of refuting an argument, whereas the proper idea of argument under discussion was not addressed or properly refuted.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

    The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition.[2][3] Straw man arguments have been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly regarding highly charged emotional subjects.

  5. #275
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    37,932
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    Just because I question prevailing opinion does not mean that I am wrong. It simply means that I require more information than someone like you does. I have done quite a bit of research into the areas that you disagree with me on and our disagreement is fine with me. I am not going to include personal insults, which appear to be your "go to" when you cannot persuade someone that they are wrong.
    And, by the way, a strawman argument is one that is thrown in to change the subject. You appear to have nothing else to resort to.
    First Bolded: Or all the experts.

    Second Bolded: Obviously you are lying.

    Third Bolded: Those aren't insults, they are analogies and true statements.


    Also, I have not changed the subject at all. I am still talking about Global Warming. But I see you have nothing else to offer.

  6. #276
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    37,932
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    Strawman, from wikipedia:\
    A straw man (sometimes written as strawman) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy of having the impression of refuting an argument, whereas the proper idea of argument under discussion was not addressed or properly refuted.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

    The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition.[2][3] Straw man arguments have been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly regarding highly charged emotional subjects.
    Thank you for the definition. Nobody here used a strawman. Calling you the anti-vaxxer of Global Warming is not a strawman.

    I see you know as much about logical fallacies as you do Global Warming.

  7. #277
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    4,843
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    You actually disagree with those links because all of those links say the current temperature increase is due to man's effects.

    We disagree. You also disagree with the experts. But I can see you are not going to change your mind on this (truly the hallmark of someone interested in the truth!).
    Not all "experts" are of the same opinion. There is a difference among them as well. As I have said, if the Paris Accords are universally enforced, I might be persuaded to agree with them. Unless and until this happens, I will continue to say they are a total, complete waste of time and money.

  8. #278
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    96,537
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Thank you for the definition. Nobody here used a strawman. Calling you the anti-vaxxer of Global Warming is not a strawman.

    I see you know as much about logical fallacies as you do Global Warming.
    It would be easy to disprove any sort of issue if he could just say that climate change is real and has been primarily caused by man.
    Let's get embedded tweets working again!

    https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...5#post33780085

  9. #279
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    37,932
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    Not all "experts" are of the same opinion. There is a difference among them as well. As I have said, if the Paris Accords are universally enforced, I might be persuaded to agree with them. Unless and until this happens, I will continue to say they are a total, complete waste of time and money.
    And there are legitimate Doctors who are anti-vaxxers, do you think that means there is a debate within the medical community on whether vaccines cause autism?

    One can reasonably debate whether the Paris accords are fair if they are not universally enforced, but the problem is not about the Paris Accords, it's that you literally don't believe the problem behind it (i.e. man made global warming).

  10. #280
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    56,698
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    Strawman, from wikipedia:\
    A straw man (sometimes written as strawman) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy of having the impression of refuting an argument, whereas the proper idea of argument under discussion was not addressed or properly refuted.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

    The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition.[2][3] Straw man arguments have been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly regarding highly charged emotional subjects.
    Oh neat. You're taking a page from Special's book.

  11. #281
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    56,698
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    Just because I question prevailing opinion does not mean that I am wrong. It simply means that I require more information than someone like you does. I have done quite a bit of research into the areas that you disagree with me on and our disagreement is fine with me. I am not going to include personal insults, which appear to be your "go to" when you cannot persuade someone that they are wrong.
    And, by the way, a strawman argument is one that is thrown in to change the subject. You appear to have nothing else to resort to.
    Lol if valade wasn't a mod, you'd be tossing insults his way and throwing a ****ing fit. No need to pretend you're the bigger man here or something.

  12. #282
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    4,843
    I will address Vlade's statement that I have no future in science with this statement.
    According to scientific method, a person proposes a theory to explain something. They then set about to prove that statement. Once they prove that their theory is correct and the only explanation for the phenomenon, the theory becomes a law. Human-caused global warming is still a theory and has yet to be proven.

  13. #283
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    37,932
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    Lol if valade wasn't a mod, you'd be tossing insults his way and throwing a ****ing fit. No need to pretend you're the bigger man here or something.
    I hope I'm not getting preferential or different treatment because I'm a mod. Being a mod is really not that big a deal lol.

  14. #284
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    4,843
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    And there are legitimate Doctors who are anti-vaxxers, do you think that means there is a debate within the medical community on whether vaccines cause autism?

    One can reasonably debate whether the Paris accords are fair if they are not universally enforced, but the problem is not about the Paris Accords, it's that you literally don't believe the problem behind it (i.e. man made global warming).
    The problem is the Paris Accords and their inconsistent enforcement. As I have said, if they are universally enforced, I might be persuaded to agree with them. Unless and until they are universally enforced, they are a total, complete waste of time and money.
    As to Drs being anti-vaxxers, I'm sure there are some that oppose vaccinating people. It is very difficult to get 100% agreement on anything in the medical community.

  15. #285
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    37,932
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    I will address Vlade's statement that I have no future in science with this statement.
    According to scientific method, a person proposes a theory to explain something. They then set about to prove that statement. Once they prove that their theory is correct and the only explanation for the phenomenon, the theory becomes a law. Human-caused global warming is still a theory and has yet to be proven.
    Actually, that isn't how the scientific method works lol.

    https://www.masterclass.com/articles...cientific-laws


    Scientific theories can be things that are known true.

    https://thehappyscientist.com/scienc...-theory-or-law

    While the law lets us calculate quite a bit about what happens, notice that it does not tell us anything about WHY it happens. That is what theories are for. In the language of science, a theory is an explanation of why and how things happen. For gravity, we use Einstein's Theory of General Relativity to explain why things fall.

Page 19 of 29 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •