| 15 Feb 2008 11:31 pm |
Addict (beyond 1337) Rep: 55  Joined: 17 Jan 2007 Posts: 5,017 OFFLINE | Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
is this you trying to justifiy your strawman argument.
No, I’m saying sometimes you think things are strawmans when they’re not because you sometimes get questions, comments and rebuttals confused.
Its not a freaken question its one of the fallacies if you just bother to read my initial post....
Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. | | | | 15 Feb 2008 11:47 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 25 Joined: 26 Dec 2007 Posts: 2,034 OFFLINE | Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
is this you trying to justifiy your strawman argument.
No, I’m saying sometimes you think things are strawmans when they’re not because you sometimes get questions, comments and rebuttals confused.
Its not a freaken question its one of the fallacies if you just bother to read my initial post....
So it’s an argument, not a question? That would explain why the text has a question mark...
 | | | 15 Feb 2008 11:54 pm |
Addict (beyond 1337) Rep: 55Joined: 17 Jan 2007 Posts: 5,017 OFFLINE | Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
is this you trying to justifiy your strawman argument.
No, I’m saying sometimes you think things are strawmans when they’re not because you sometimes get questions, comments and rebuttals confused.
Its not a freaken question its one of the fallacies if you just bother to read my initial post....
So it’s an argument, not a question? That would explain why the text has a question mark...
from chance.. no thats a assumption that I believe that its from chance and that it is from chance, I refute this and from their I get someone like you come along.
Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. | | | 15 Feb 2008 11:55 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 25Joined: 26 Dec 2007 Posts: 2,034 OFFLINE | "How could complex organs like the eye evolve from chance?"
That IS a question.
Now your typical reaction would be to call that a strawman when it’s a question, not an argument. ---
| | | 15 Feb 2008 11:57 pm |
Addict (beyond 1337) Rep: 55Joined: 17 Jan 2007 Posts: 5,017 OFFLINE | Sean of the Living wrote:
“How could complex organs like the eye evolve from chance?"
That IS a question.
Now your typical reaction would be to call that a strawman when it’s a question, not an argument.
When have I called this a strawman. Quote me.
Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. | | | 15 Feb 2008 11:57 pm |
Addict (beyond 1337) Rep: 55Joined: 17 Jan 2007 Posts: 5,017 OFFLINE | loaded questions: embodies an assumption that, if answered, indicates an implied agreement. (e.g., Have you stopped beating your wife yet?) ---
Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena.Last edited 15 Feb 2008 11:58 pm by Gplex | | | 16 Feb 2008 12:14 am |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 25Joined: 26 Dec 2007 Posts: 2,034 OFFLINE | Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
“How could complex organs like the eye evolve from chance?"
That IS a question.
Now your typical reaction would be to call that a strawman when it’s a question, not an argument.
When have I called this a strawman. Quote me.
The comic you posted heavily implied that it’s a strawman. In case you haven’t noticed, you don’t post “facts” to back up QUESTIONS.
| | | 16 Feb 2008 12:16 am |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 25Joined: 26 Dec 2007 Posts: 2,034 OFFLINE | Gplex wrote:
loaded questions: embodies an assumption that, if answered, indicates an implied agreement. (e.g., Have you stopped beating your wife yet?)
It’s not making a direct assumption of anything, it’s asking you how organs like the eye can evolve from chance. Of course, people like you would rather say it’s a fallacy than answer.
Avoiding the question:
Yes, I think you know what that is.
Last edited 16 Feb 2008 12:16 am by Sean of the Living | | | 16 Feb 2008 12:21 am |
The Mangekyou Sharingan Rep: 50 Joined: 01 Oct 2007 Posts: 10,520 OFFLINE | Haha... ---
 
“Great new ideas usually come from very small teams... don’t give up so easily." — John Kaster — | | | 16 Feb 2008 01:49 pm |
Addict (beyond 1337) Rep: 55Joined: 17 Jan 2007 Posts: 5,017 OFFLINE | Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
loaded questions: embodies an assumption that, if answered, indicates an implied agreement. (e.g., Have you stopped beating your wife yet?)
It’s not making a direct assumption of anything, it’s asking you how organs like the eye can evolve from chance. Of course, people like you would rather say it’s a fallacy than answer.
Avoiding the question:
Yes, I think you know what that is.
Not able to find a quote yet, ok lets try my question, are you not going to kill so may people this year?
This matches up with the asumption that they “eye came from random chance”. Natural selection is not random. I’ve explain this many many many many many many times through out this thread.
Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena.Last edited 16 Feb 2008 01:50 pm by Gplex | | | 16 Feb 2008 08:05 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 25Joined: 26 Dec 2007 Posts: 2,034 OFFLINE | Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
loaded questions: embodies an assumption that, if answered, indicates an implied agreement. (e.g., Have you stopped beating your wife yet?)
It’s not making a direct assumption of anything, it’s asking you how organs like the eye can evolve from chance. Of course, people like you would rather say it’s a fallacy than answer.
Avoiding the question:
Yes, I think you know what that is.
Not able to find a quote yet, ok lets try my question, are you not going to kill so may people this year?
This matches up with the asumption that they “eye came from random chance”. Natural selection is not random. I’ve explain this many many many many many many times through out this thread.
Did you mean “so many?"
Sometimes an assumption can be made with a question. What if somebody DOES beat their wife and you ask them if they’ve stopped yet?
| | | 16 Feb 2008 08:44 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 6 Joined: 01 Oct 2005 Posts: 3,602 OFFLINE | Gplex wrote:
Itachi Uchiha wrote:
since you need proof of hell why dont you die first so you can see it with ur eyes... sciences cant get close to POLTERGEIST...
But my eyes will still be here with my dead body.
Yes your dead body, along with your unfunctioning brain which will be slowly melting inside your skull, till it bubbles from your mouth. But you wont care, because you wont be able to think, nor be sad or mad or love. According to you, when you die, you will stop, poof forever, no more thoughts, no more ideas, no more walks or nights in front of your computer, no more sex, hell no more masturbating. But you wont care because you will have gone, you wont even care that you can’t care because you will be gone, nothing left but salt…if that. And all your self will blot and melt, or char and burn ( I don’t know what you plan to have done). And every one you knew and loved will begin to forget you, and when they’re gone, you will have been forgotten, not even your memory will survive more then 50 years. And you will, by then have become sediment or a foul smelling liquid paste in an over pressurized concrete sealed coffin in the dirt. And you won’t even be able to care, along with that, no one else will care either, you will have been destroyed completely.
But to each his own.
Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it." | | | 16 Feb 2008 08:54 pm |
Thanatos, God of Death Rep: 63 Joined: 31 Jan 2008 Posts: 14,451 OFFLINE | Weasel 16 wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Itachi Uchiha wrote:
since you need proof of hell why dont you die first so you can see it with ur eyes... sciences cant get close to POLTERGEIST...
But my eyes will still be here with my dead body.
Yes your dead body, along with your unfunctioning brain which will be slowly melting inside your skull, till it bubbles from your mouth. But you wont care, because you wont be able to think, nor be sad or mad or love. According to you, when you die, you will stop, poof forever, no more thoughts, no more ideas, no more walks or nights in front of your computer, no more sex, hell no more masturbating. But you wont care because you will have gone, you wont even care that you can’t care because you will be gone, nothing left but salt…if that. And all your self will blot and melt, or char and burn ( I don’t know what you plan to have done). And every one you knew and loved will begin to forget you, and when they’re gone, you will have been forgotten, not even your memory will survive more then 50 years. And you will, by then have become sediment or a foul smelling liquid paste in an over pressurized concrete sealed coffin in the dirt. And you won’t even be able to care, along with that, no one else will care either, you will have been destroyed completely.
But to each his own.
All your sences are physical, so it’s not like you’ll be concious for an afterlife either.
 | | | 16 Feb 2008 11:55 pm |
Addict (beyond 1337) Rep: 55Joined: 17 Jan 2007 Posts: 5,017 OFFLINE | Weasel 16 wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Itachi Uchiha wrote:
since you need proof of hell why dont you die first so you can see it with ur eyes... sciences cant get close to POLTERGEIST...
But my eyes will still be here with my dead body.
Yes your dead body, along with your unfunctioning brain which will be slowly melting inside your skull, till it bubbles from your mouth. But you wont care, because you wont be able to think, nor be sad or mad or love. According to you, when you die, you will stop, poof forever, no more thoughts, no more ideas, no more walks or nights in front of your computer, no more sex, hell no more masturbating. But you wont care because you will have gone, you wont even care that you can’t care because you will be gone, nothing left but salt…if that. And all your self will blot and melt, or char and burn ( I don’t know what you plan to have done). And every one you knew and loved will begin to forget you, and when they’re gone, you will have been forgotten, not even your memory will survive more then 50 years. And you will, by then have become sediment or a foul smelling liquid paste in an over pressurized concrete sealed coffin in the dirt. And you won’t even be able to care, along with that, no one else will care either, you will have been destroyed completely.
But to each his own.
Im going to be cremated thankyou, but all the evidence points to this future.
Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. | | | 16 Feb 2008 11:59 pm |
Addict (beyond 1337) Rep: 55Joined: 17 Jan 2007 Posts: 5,017 OFFLINE | Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
loaded questions: embodies an assumption that, if answered, indicates an implied agreement. (e.g., Have you stopped beating your wife yet?)
It’s not making a direct assumption of anything, it’s asking you how organs like the eye can evolve from chance. Of course, people like you would rather say it’s a fallacy than answer.
Avoiding the question:
Yes, I think you know what that is.
Not able to find a quote yet, ok lets try my question, are you not going to kill so may people this year?
This matches up with the asumption that they “eye came from random chance”. Natural selection is not random. I’ve explain this many many many many many many times through out this thread.
Did you mean “so many?"
Sometimes an assumption can be made with a question. What if somebody DOES beat their wife and you ask them if they’ve stopped yet?
and you made the assumption that evolution is random chance.
Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. | | | 17 Feb 2008 12:37 am |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 25Joined: 26 Dec 2007 Posts: 2,034 OFFLINE | ChibiDiscoDhaos wrote:
Weasel 16 wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Itachi Uchiha wrote:
since you need proof of hell why dont you die first so you can see it with ur eyes... sciences cant get close to POLTERGEIST...
But my eyes will still be here with my dead body.
Yes your dead body, along with your unfunctioning brain which will be slowly melting inside your skull, till it bubbles from your mouth. But you wont care, because you wont be able to think, nor be sad or mad or love. According to you, when you die, you will stop, poof forever, no more thoughts, no more ideas, no more walks or nights in front of your computer, no more sex, hell no more masturbating. But you wont care because you will have gone, you wont even care that you can’t care because you will be gone, nothing left but salt…if that. And all your self will blot and melt, or char and burn ( I don’t know what you plan to have done). And every one you knew and loved will begin to forget you, and when they’re gone, you will have been forgotten, not even your memory will survive more then 50 years. And you will, by then have become sediment or a foul smelling liquid paste in an over pressurized concrete sealed coffin in the dirt. And you won’t even be able to care, along with that, no one else will care either, you will have been destroyed completely.
But to each his own.
All your sences are physical, so it’s not like you’ll be concious for an afterlife either.
Doesn’t the Bible and Quran say they will be given a body in Hell?
| | | 17 Feb 2008 12:39 am |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 25Joined: 26 Dec 2007 Posts: 2,034 OFFLINE | Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
loaded questions: embodies an assumption that, if answered, indicates an implied agreement. (e.g., Have you stopped beating your wife yet?)
It’s not making a direct assumption of anything, it’s asking you how organs like the eye can evolve from chance. Of course, people like you would rather say it’s a fallacy than answer.
Avoiding the question:
Yes, I think you know what that is.
Not able to find a quote yet, ok lets try my question, are you not going to kill so may people this year?
This matches up with the asumption that they “eye came from random chance”. Natural selection is not random. I’ve explain this many many many many many many times through out this thread.
Did you mean “so many?"
Sometimes an assumption can be made with a question. What if somebody DOES beat their wife and you ask them if they’ve stopped yet?
and you made the assumption that evolution is random chance.
Some of it is.
In fact, without intelligence behind it the way everything works is pretty much chance.
Even if so, the comic you posted states that the remark is a strawman argument when you claim it to be a loaded question.
Last edited 17 Feb 2008 12:40 am by Sean of the Living | | | 17 Feb 2008 12:50 am |
Banned Rep: 51 Joined: 07 Jul 2006 Posts: 14,808 OFFLINE | Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
loaded questions: embodies an assumption that, if answered, indicates an implied agreement. (e.g., Have you stopped beating your wife yet?)
It’s not making a direct assumption of anything, it’s asking you how organs like the eye can evolve from chance. Of course, people like you would rather say it’s a fallacy than answer.
Avoiding the question:
Yes, I think you know what that is.
Not able to find a quote yet, ok lets try my question, are you not going to kill so may people this year?
This matches up with the asumption that they “eye came from random chance”. Natural selection is not random. I’ve explain this many many many many many many times through out this thread.
Did you mean “so many?"
Sometimes an assumption can be made with a question. What if somebody DOES beat their wife and you ask them if they’ve stopped yet?
and you made the assumption that evolution is random chance.
Some of it is.
In fact, without intelligence behind it the way everything works is pretty much chance.
Even if so, the comic you posted states that the remark is a strawman argument when you claim it to be a loaded question.
To say that something needs to have intelligence behind it in order for it not to be random is very foolish. Natural selection is not random yet it requires no intelligence. My thermometer has no intelligence but it can tell me the exact temperature. Polarity has no intelligence yet it can select opposites.
Your claim that without intelligence there would only be chance can’t hold any ground.
Zeitgeist: Addendum
Join “The Zeitgeist Movement” | | | 17 Feb 2008 12:51 am |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 25Joined: 26 Dec 2007 Posts: 2,034 OFFLINE | ramunematt wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
Sean of the Living wrote:
Gplex wrote:
loaded questions: embodies an assumption that, if answered, indicates an implied agreement. (e.g., Have you stopped beating your wife yet?)
It’s not making a direct assumption of anything, it’s asking you how organs like the eye can evolve from chance. Of course, people like you would rather say it’s a fallacy than answer.
Avoiding the question:
Yes, I think you know what that is.
Not able to find a quote yet, ok lets try my question, are you not going to kill so may people this year?
This matches up with the asumption that they “eye came from random chance”. Natural selection is not random. I’ve explain this many many many many many many times through out this thread.
Did you mean “so many?"
Sometimes an assumption can be made with a question. What if somebody DOES beat their wife and you ask them if they’ve stopped yet?
and you made the assumption that evolution is random chance.
Some of it is.
In fact, without intelligence behind it the way everything works is pretty much chance.
Even if so, the comic you posted states that the remark is a strawman argument when you claim it to be a loaded question.
To say that something needs to have intelligence behind it in order for it not to be random is very foolish. Natural selection is not random yet it requires no intelligence. My thermometer has no intelligence but it can tell me the exact temperature. Polarity has no intelligence yet it can select opposites.
Your claim that without intelligence there would only be chance can’t hold any ground.
Well if you go back far enough the way all of those things work would have been decided by chance, of course let’s not get into physics.
Last edited 17 Feb 2008 12:52 am by Sean of the Living | | | 17 Feb 2008 12:52 am |
Addict (beyond 1337) Rep: 55Joined: 17 Jan 2007 Posts: 5,017 OFFLINE | ramunematt wrote:
To say that something needs to have intelligence behind it in order for it not to be random is very foolish. Natural selection is not random yet it requires no intelligence. My thermometer has no intelligence but it can tell me the exact temperature. Polarity has no intelligence yet it can select opposites.
Your claim that without intelligence there would only be chance can’t hold any ground.
Oh you always ruin my fun... theist logics is really funny.
Theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. | | |
|
Previous Page - Post Reply - Next Page |
|
»
Religion
» Common fallacies.
