Author Topic: Lie by Lie (Read 1481 times)

lukster · « **Reply #30 on:** September 05, 2006, 10:13:19 AM »

I didn't see the whole timeline, my mistake.

Momus-- · « **Reply #31 on:** September 05, 2006, 10:24:48 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Neubob
As a side note, I think that's it's amazing with what predictability a person's geographic origin dictates his/her beliefs, at least on these boards.

And another.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #32 on:** September 05, 2006, 10:57:57 AM »

Momus your rules and logic are worthless here. But thanks for keeping score. I think I'm like 12-0 in this thread.

lukster · « **Reply #33 on:** September 05, 2006, 11:14:25 AM »

Do you consider omission of relavent events to be a "lie" Funked? I do and this "historical reference" you linked is full of them. Not a single mention of the many violations by Saddam of the terms of his surrender. I'm sorry but your "nice historical reference" isn't.

moot · « **Reply #34 on:** September 05, 2006, 11:20:14 AM »

Momus, Neubob didn't even specify the precision of said predictability.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #35 on:** September 05, 2006, 11:22:23 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunthr
Funked, you went way way left . I don't think you are far from listing "warcrimes committed by Israel" and presenting engineering theories that prove the WTC collapse couldn't have been caused by aircraft, and the pentagon attacked itself, etc...

what has that school done to you?

I don't usually reply to ad hominem arguments (would rather discuss the thread topic than discuss me, and personal attacks are contrary to the forum rules) but I'll make an exception. You're absolutely correct. I have become a pro-gun, anti-abortion, anti-tax, anti-pc, anti-affirmative action, pro-property rights, pro-family values, anti-big government, pro-national defense, pro-free trade, anti-environmentalist, liberal.

Neubob · « **Reply #36 on:** September 05, 2006, 11:33:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Momus--
And another.

Posting links has become a very popular short-cut to conversation... I wish I could master the art when speaking to people one on one. Instead of answering the question of how the weather is that day, I could just refer them to a website that explains why the question is silly.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #37 on:** September 05, 2006, 11:42:13 AM »

I think he's just trying to provide a service to people who don't understand how to construct logical arguments.

Neubob · « **Reply #38 on:** September 05, 2006, 12:08:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FUNKED1
I think he's just trying to provide a service to people who don't understand how to construct logical arguments.

Logical arguments to what? Your initial post was nothing but another link, dropped like a steaming road-apple for all to gawk at. If you'd actually said something other than 'gee guys, look at this!' there might have been something to talk about. As it stands, you didn't, and the fact that Momus is in general agreement with the pre-digested rhetoric within said post, he ran in to support the cause, armed, as usual, with more links and enough smugness to make Dick Chaney look like Little Bo Peep.

Personally, I take no offense to your core beliefs (I'm assuming I understand you correctly). Hell, I even agree some of the time. I just think it's silly when you take a website and flash it around like some logo-heavy machine-pressed picket sign at political rally.

Momus-- · « **Reply #39 on:** September 05, 2006, 12:22:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Neubob
...and the fact that Momus is in general agreement with the pre-digested rhetoric within said post, he ran in to support the cause

You're ascribing to me an argument I didn't make, which is a straw man fallacy yet again.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #40 on:** September 05, 2006, 12:28:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Neubob
Logical arguments to what?...

I didn't mean you, I meant the people whose attempts to refute the facts in my (admittedly flawed) link consist solely of arguments which suffer from the fallacies outlined by Momus and myself.

Neubob · « **Reply #41 on:** September 05, 2006, 12:37:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Momus--
You're ascribing to me an argument I didn't make, which is a straw man fallacy yet again.

Actually, Momus, I don't agree with you. You may argue for Funked's standpoint, you may argue that the approaches of the others are fallacious and rhetorically impotent, you can even argue against my declaration that geographic location is a major factor in generating an opinion. You may argue none of all of these things. It doesn't matter to me.

My only argument, for which purpose I use the context of this thread only out of convenience, is that you're being silly. Whatever arguments I ascribed to you I did out of an intuitive (perhaps flawed) belief that you side with Funked on this matter in general, and not just on the matter of which arguments are relevant and which are two-dimensional distractions.

In short, I find the profuse usage of links funny, in this and in all cases.

So there.

Momus-- · « **Reply #42 on:** September 05, 2006, 01:45:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Neubob
My only argument, for which purpose I use the context of this thread only out of convenience, is that you're being silly.

Appeal to ridicule doesn't work either I'm afraid.

Neubob · « **Reply #43 on:** September 05, 2006, 01:51:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Momus--
Appeal to ridicule doesn't work either I'm afraid.

As there was never a viable debate here, and my appeal to redicule was never designed to discredit any alleged claims from your side(since, by your own admission, you made none), I'd like to move to redesignate this 'appeal to redicule' as a plain and simple 'mockery'.

Is mockery allowed, given the absence of any coherent subject matter?

Momus-- · « **Reply #44 on:** September 05, 2006, 01:56:59 PM »

This is getting rediculous now.