So much for the tidal "tilt" theory

Quote from: Gulliver on August 27, 2007, 10:23:27 AM

Nope, it was not. It was an insult to ask such a question. Furthermore, check your grammar primer. It was a comma splice of a declarative sentence and a question.

It's an insult to ask about someone's intelligence? That's an interesting opinion. I could have formed the question another way, but it wouldn't have served its purpose.

And I wasn't making a statement; the full thing was a question. They are more commonly known as tag questions.

So you admit a purpose! You admit that you formed the question with the embedded insult as it served your purpose as opposed to forming your question with a compliment. It seems reasonable to conclude that your purpose was therefore to insult. So we have your very own statement leading us to conclude that your post was an ad hominem attack and that you lied about its nature afterward.

Good Lord, ENOUGH!

So you admit a purpose! You admit that you formed the question with the embedded insult as it served your purpose as opposed to forming your question with a compliment. It seems reasonable to conclude that your purpose was therefore to insult. So we have your very own statement leading us to conclude that your post was an ad hominem attack and that you lied about its nature afterward.

Do questions ever not have a purpose? The purpose to asking the question in that form was to receive an answer that would invoke further discussion, and not just receive a simple answer. It wasn't formed with an insult embedded. If I wanted to insult the person, it's rather easy based on the substance of his posts. Instead, I just asked a question.

Divito is the fuel gulliver needs.

Divito is the fuel gulliver needs.

Unleaded, I hope.

Quote from: narcberry on August 27, 2007, 10:47:53 AM

Divito is the fuel gulliver needs.

Unleaded, I hope.

It would be foolish to assume purely unleaded, but definately reasonably unleaded.

its uranium, guys. Sheesh. Fission is the way of the future!

This guy isn't too bright, is he?

It seems to me its not really an argument against the man if he's not using it in an argument and instead just asking it.

Quote from: divito on August 27, 2007, 07:47:34 AM

This guy isn't too bright, is he?

It seems to me its not really an argument against the man if he's not using it in an argument and instead just asking it.

It's an ad hominem fallacy, attempting to turn the debate from issue to person.

It's an ad hominem fallacy, attempting to turn the debate from issue to person.

Doesn't there was much of a debate or an attempt to turn it, at least to me. 

Quote from: Username on August 27, 2007, 03:14:35 PM

Quote from: divito on August 27, 2007, 07:47:34 AM

This guy isn't too bright, is he?

It seems to me its not really an argument against the man if he's not using it in an argument and instead just asking it.

It's an ad hominem fallacy, attempting to turn the debate from issue to person.

In other words, how every thread here turns out?

It's an ad hominem fallacy, attempting to turn the debate from issue to person.

All of this just goes to show what smacked assholes these people who actually believe the earth is flat. I think most of them are just a bunch of dorks who think this whole thing is funny.

Here is a newsflash - it isn't funny at all and nobody is laughing.

Definitely a pertinent issue worth rebutting.

Quote

It's an ad hominem fallacy, attempting to turn the debate from issue to person.

Doesn't there was much of a debate or an attempt to turn it, at least to me. 

There doesn't seem to be much of a sentence in your post, at least to me.

Sorry,
There wasn't much of a debate or an attempt to turn it.

Quote from: Gulliver on August 27, 2007, 03:31:23 PM

It's an ad hominem fallacy, attempting to turn the debate from issue to person.

Quote

All of this just goes to show what smacked assholes these people who actually believe the earth is flat. I think most of them are just a bunch of dorks who think this whole thing is funny.

Here is a newsflash - it isn't funny at all and nobody is laughing.

Definitely a pertinent issue worth rebutting.

Sure--if you ignore all the issue-related posts in this thread--you've got a point. But when you read his point and the intelligent responses, there definitely is a pertinent issue.

Quote from: divito on August 27, 2007, 04:20:37 PM

Quote from: Gulliver on August 27, 2007, 03:31:23 PM

It's an ad hominem fallacy, attempting to turn the debate from issue to person.

Quote

All of this just goes to show what smacked assholes these people who actually believe the earth is flat. I think most of them are just a bunch of dorks who think this whole thing is funny.

Here is a newsflash - it isn't funny at all and nobody is laughing.

Definitely a pertinent issue worth rebutting.

Sure--if you ignore all the issue-related posts in this thread--you've got a point. But when you read his point and the intelligent responses, there definitely is a pertinent issue.

dude, you are debating with someone who thinks the earth is flat...what do you expect!!!

dude, you are debating with someone who thinks the earth is flat...what do you expect!!!

Nevermind, he answered my question for me Gulliver. My point manifested, in one clear sentence.

Before Divito hops in here: He doesn't believe in an FE.

Before Divito hops in here: He doesn't believe in an FE.

I wasn't actually going to say anything; I was going to let him continue his delusions.

Before Divito hops in here: He doesn't believe in an FE.

NO WAI!  My belief system is shattered.

Divito! You changed your avatar, didn't notice you had already posted.


So, can we get back on topic, please?

So, can we get back on topic, please?

You are a funny guy.

Ignoring the man with the IQ of less this keyboard, can we get back on topic?

Ignoring the man with the IQ of less this keyboard, can we get back on topic?

Insults should be worded carefully.

And no, have you ever tried to re-rail a train? It's as futile as fighting a war in Iraq. There is no way you can do it, unless you have more tanks.

Again, ignoring the man with an IQ of less than this keyboard, can we get back on topic?

Last time I checked, "this keyboard" is not a value.  I believe you mean to say "IQ lower than this keyboard's."

Assholes.

Assholes.

I knew you could do it, you just needed some coaching.

Last time I checked, "this keyboard" is not a value.  I believe you mean to say "IQ lower than this keyboard's."

Either way I think we can still agree Narcberry's IQ is less than it. Even if one isn't a value.