Poor Deductive Reasoning

becasue the last thread where i posted this has become quite off topic,
im reposting it here.

To further rant a bit,
My statement that FE conspiracy has poor deductive reasoning has yet to be refuted!

FE Deductive reasoning:
1)the earth is flat
2)if anyone says otherwise, they are lieing
3)NASA says the earth is round

conclusion)therefore, NASA is lieing.

but, lets change that first premise:
1)the earth is round
2)if anyone says otherwise, they are lieing
3)FES says the earth is flat

conclusion) therefore, FES is lieing.

Using your own poor reasoning, i have constructed my own argument that is equally weak but also shows how you cannot base a conclusion on the fact that you are correct.

discuss

Can you refute all FES claims? If not we cannot be lying. 

Simple is better...

You are lying.

i am not trying to refute all FES claims, just the conspiracy one.
you are basing the conclusion on the assumption that you are correct.

Lying is a pretty strong word.

Besides:

"1)the earth is round
2)if anyone says otherwise, they are lieing
3)FES says the earth is flat"

doesn't work as the earth isn't round

i am not trying to refute all FES claims, just the conspiracy one.
you are basing the conclusion on the assumption that you are correct.

Of course. All theories assume they are correct. Including RE theory

Simple is better...

You are lying.

simple is better?
a worldwide conspiracy that will kill me if i go to antarctica isnt simple.

Quote from: sphere_man on October 09, 2008, 06:50:49 PM

i am not trying to refute all FES claims, just the conspiracy one.
you are basing the conclusion on the assumption that you are correct.

Of course. All theories assume they are correct. Including RE theory

no, theories do not use evidence that is only true if they are correct.

Lying is a pretty strong word.

Besides:

"1)the earth is round
2)if anyone says otherwise, they are lieing
3)FES says the earth is flat"

doesn't work as the earth isn't round

listen, premises are used to come to a conclusion, not the other way around.
i could say exactly as you said, "your theory doesnt work becasue the earth is round"

Quote from: Johannes Kepler on October 09, 2008, 06:51:38 PM

Quote from: sphere_man on October 09, 2008, 06:50:49 PM

i am not trying to refute all FES claims, just the conspiracy one.
you are basing the conclusion on the assumption that you are correct.

Of course. All theories assume they are correct. Including RE theory

no, theories do not use evidence that is only true if they are correct.

There is FE evidence that doesn't need to be assumed true. This isn't math induction its simple reasoning.

For instance: We cannot observe the curvature of the earth.

Quote from: Johannes Kepler on October 09, 2008, 06:50:57 PM

Lying is a pretty strong word.

Besides:

"1)the earth is round
2)if anyone says otherwise, they are lieing
3)FES says the earth is flat"

doesn't work as the earth isn't round

listen, premises are used to come to a conclusion, not the other way around.
i could say exactly as you said, "your theory doesnt work becasue the earth is round"

You should expand your 3 step list to include the research done towards a flat earth then.

look, the research done regarding FE is highly dependent on the conspiracy,
and the conspiracy is highly dependent on the fact that FE is correct.

Your point being?

RE is highly dependant on NASA ESA AND Russian federation not lying. You are believing Ex NAZI!

 

my point is that if FE is incorrect, it all comes crumbling down.
you have never once assumed your own possible incorrectness?

Of course, but it doesn't matter because FET is true. I always second guess myself but I am usually right.

so you have not considered the possibility of FE being correct?
i have at least dont you the honor of dropping my personal view and consider your possibility...

I have considered RE and FE, but have found FE to make the most sense.

does making sense constitute undeniable truth?

There is no undeniable proof of RE

There is logic behind FE

FE has explanations

FE explanations are not disproven

therefore FE true

The bilderbergs are controlling the world right now. FES is a headache for them because if they get rid of us every FES member will know FET is true.

There is no undeniable proof of RE

There is logic behind FE

FE has explanations

FE explanations are not disproven

therefore FE true

The bilderbergs are controlling the world right now. FES is a headache for them because if they get rid of us every FES member will know FET is true.

Ther is no UNDENIABLE truth. EVER. for anything.
exept, mabe as descartes puts it, that i am a thinking thing.
There is logic behind RE, too
RE has explanations, too
that is not a well laid out dedution of reasoning you have there.

simple is better?
a worldwide conspiracy that will kill me if i go to antarctica isnt simple.

You are right... that is complicated.

Simple is still better. I am right and you are wrong. No lying necessary.

Quote from: sphere_man on October 09, 2008, 06:53:00 PM

simple is better?
a worldwide conspiracy that will kill me if i go to antarctica isnt simple.

You are right... that is complicated.

Simple is still better. I am right and you are wrong. No lying necessary.

RE is simple
very complex systems of rotation that cannot be explained combined with bendy light and sky mirrors is not simple! you have said this yourself! or was that sarcasm? read my caption.

so, by your argument, RE is better

stop saying that im wrong and you are right, we are not on a preschool playground.

RE is very complicated

You cannot prove a round earth

therefore flat earth

stop saying that im wrong and you are right, we are not on a preschool playground.

OKay... you win... You are right. I am wrong.

sphere_man what is up with your sig

i think that FE is much more complicated.
it has evern been said that RE is simple in this thread by a FEer.
and, once again, you are using poor deductive reasoning.
a or b.
not b.
therefore a.

that works just fine, but YOU CANNOT USE UNCERTAINTIES IN RHETORIC PREMISES OR THE CONCLUSION IS UNCERTAIN AS WELL

sphere_man what is up with your sig

that is not even funny.
for anyone else reading, mr kepler has been talking to me in personal mesages and my sig is a quote from him.

i think that FE is much more complicated.
it has evern been said that RE is simple in this thread by a FEer.
and, once again, you are using poor deductive reasoning.
a or b.
not b.
therefore a.

that works just fine, but YOU CANNOT USE UNCERTAINTIES IN RHETORIC PREMISES OR THE CONCLUSION IS UNCERTAIN AS WELL

10 points for using capslock...

you are (like most of FE) skirting my arguments and merely stating personal attacks and deviations from the thread.
just stop. please.