I have never invoked one single fallacy that I know of.
I can't imagine that you've avoided appealing to authority. Negative proof fallacy and argument from ignorance are very popular around here. Appeal to ridicule is also one that shows up, as well as wishful thinking. Whether you've invoked any of these can't really be determined from my point of view. Probabilistically though, you've at least invoked one to claim some type of knowledge set you have.
My only fear is the people who really think they know their shit on here dont have the educactional background and knowledge to even comprehend what he is explaining. That is speculation though because I dont know who all has their doctorate in Astrophysics on here and who has been a consultant for NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory like my friend.
Well, thinking that educational background translates into intelligence would be somewhat illogical. Personally, my friends and neighbors who haven't done certain schooling or achieved high GPAs, are more intelligent and successful than those who did go to school. I suppose it depends on what type of intelligence and success you're trying to establish though, I digress.
It would be interesting to see any such debate that arises from your friend's involvement though.
You guys misplace the appeal to the authority fallacy. I have pointed that out to Tom Bishop in this thread. And if you are not misusing it then you are hypocritical because I have seen FErs do the exact same including Tom who I have seen refer to books by FErs.
Appeal to authority from my understanding is this:
Description of Appeal to Authority
An Appeal to Authority is a fallacy with the following form:
1. Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S.
2. Person A makes claim C about subject S.
3. Therefore, C is true.
This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject. More formally, if person A is not qualified to make reliable claims in subject S, then the argument will be fallacious.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.htmlI have watched you guys pull that fallacy out of context way too much on here. NASA is known to be a legitimate authority on the subject of astrophysics. Whether you believe that is a different story because the first rule of logic is belief does not equal truth. So next time you want to use that against someone try keeping it in context.
And as for my friend not being intelligent just because he has an education does not really play here. Sorry, but there is not one person on the planet who could fake their way through a doctorate in Astrophysics without being smart. And NASA and the California Institute of Technology did not seek him out because they thought he might know what he is talking about.
I dont mind PMing you the link to his bio if you want to read up a little bit on him. Like I said earlier in this thread, I have been friends with him since elementary school and to this day I have not met a more intelligent person. He made a great egg drop contest partner in Junior High as well. Of course he wouldnt let me help but I got to watch and still got the A.