The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers

  • 580 Replies
  • 69531 Views
*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers
« Reply #570 on: January 01, 2012, 02:26:04 PM »
I have good reason to believe that. Again, it distorts the Atlantic Ocean, and that has too much traffic for the distances to be inaccurate.



Qantas Airways have been flying out of Australia for almost a century, to 21 international destinations. You happily disregard an entire continent of eyewitnesses, but a distorted ocean is too much for you to swallow? That's just beautiful. Give me more, I'll get the popcorn.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers
« Reply #571 on: January 01, 2012, 02:37:59 PM »
Argumentum ad ridiculum

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers
« Reply #572 on: January 01, 2012, 04:36:26 PM »
Tausami, you really need to stop pretending you understand fallacies.

My belief that you're being ridiculous is my conclusion, not my basis.

My basis is the fact that your standards for determining accuracy are not fairly applied to both maps. You deny one based on distortion in a heavily travelled area, while you accept the other despite the same issue.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers
« Reply #573 on: January 01, 2012, 04:40:44 PM »
Tausami, you really need to stop pretending you understand fallacies.
What he said. Clearly he was mocking your fantasy map and its implications.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers
« Reply #574 on: January 01, 2012, 04:43:07 PM »
Tausami, you really need to stop pretending you understand fallacies.

My belief that you're being ridiculous is my conclusion, not my basis.

My basis is the fact that your standards for determining accuracy are not fairly applied to both maps. You deny one based on distortion in a heavily travelled area, while you accept the other despite the same issue.

Sorry, I meant reductio ad ricidulum

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers
« Reply #575 on: January 01, 2012, 04:46:52 PM »
That's the same thing. ::)
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers
« Reply #576 on: January 01, 2012, 05:13:45 PM »
That's the same thing. ::)

No, it's not. In an argumentum, the argument is flawed logically but is otherwise sound. In a reductio, one is trying to reduce the standing of the other argument. Reductio is Latin for reduction.

Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers
« Reply #577 on: January 01, 2012, 05:37:37 PM »
That's the same thing. ::)

No, it's not. In an argumentum, the argument is flawed logically but is otherwise sound. In a reductio, one is trying to reduce the standing of the other argument. Reductio is Latin for reduction.
Do you think that 'reducio ad absurdum' is a fallacy? It's not. Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers
« Reply #578 on: January 01, 2012, 09:08:03 PM »
That's the same thing. ::)

No, it's not. In an argumentum, the argument is flawed logically but is otherwise sound. In a reductio, one is trying to reduce the standing of the other argument. Reductio is Latin for reduction.

Stop embarrassing yourself, you obviously don't know what you're talking about. Argumentum simply means argument, and a "reductio" is a type of argument. Do you think you have invalidated my response by changing the word you used? I would have said the exact same thing had you said "reductio" in the first place.




Do you think that 'reducio ad absurdum' is a fallacy? It's not. Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

According to this page, it seems "ridicule" and "absurdity" are treated as distinct, where the former refers to fallacy and the latter refers to a valid argument.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2012, 09:14:42 PM by zarg »
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers
« Reply #579 on: January 01, 2012, 10:45:06 PM »
Do you think that 'reducio ad absurdum' is a fallacy? It's not. Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

According to this page, it seems "ridicule" and "absurdity" are treated as distinct, where the former refers to fallacy and the latter refers to a valid argument.
You need to note that "Appeal to Ridicule" is a fallacy. "Reduction to the absurd" is a fine argument. 
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers
« Reply #580 on: January 05, 2012, 12:29:03 PM »
Do you think that 'reducio ad absurdum' is a fallacy? It's not. Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

According to this page, it seems "ridicule" and "absurdity" are treated as distinct, where the former refers to fallacy and the latter refers to a valid argument.
You need to note that "Appeal to Ridicule" is a fallacy. "Reduction to the absurd" is a fine argument.

And this thread has officially devolved into an argument about romanic grammar.