Poll

What is the shape of the earth

Round
Flat
Superposition of every shape at once untill definitivley proven otherwise
I dont care what shape it is as long as i'm able to live on it
Hexoganal Prism
Other
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Shape of the earth?

  • 62 Replies
  • 9836 Views
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #30 on: February 28, 2012, 08:26:18 PM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on February 28, 2012, 08:11:52 PM
Quote from: markjo on February 28, 2012, 08:07:55 PM
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on February 28, 2012, 10:22:17 AM
Regarding Ichy's credentials, I have personally read (glowing) articles in mainstream publications about him - he is doing very well in his field.

However, does Ichy "doing very well in his field" make him an authority on the true shape of the earth?

I didn't claim it did, and nor did he. Assuming this is just an accidental strawman argument, do you have a point?

Sounds like he did to me.
Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on February 25, 2012, 08:59:13 AM
I am a leading scientist. The earth is flat. Statement disproved.
If Ichy's field of expertise is not relevant to the shape of the earth, then he is committing an Appeal to False Authority fallacy. 
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #31 on: February 28, 2012, 08:54:29 PM »
No, he wasn't. He was responding to another poster in an attempt to disprove their argument. I'm not sure he did, as I don't think brad made the claim Ichi appeared to think he'd made, but no matter what way you look at it, it wasn't an appeal to false authority. As in, not even remotely.
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #32 on: February 28, 2012, 09:25:42 PM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on February 28, 2012, 08:54:29 PM
No, he wasn't. He was responding to another poster in an attempt to disprove their argument. I'm not sure he did, as I don't think brad made the claim Ichi appeared to think he'd made, but no matter what way you look at it, it wasn't an appeal to false authority. As in, not even remotely.

Ichy stated that his is a leading scientist.  Ichy then stated that the earth is flat.  Either he committed an appeal to false authority or he committed a non sequitur.  Either way, it was fallacious.
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #33 on: February 29, 2012, 06:44:08 AM »
Quote from: markjo on February 28, 2012, 09:25:42 PM
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on February 28, 2012, 08:54:29 PM
No, he wasn't. He was responding to another poster in an attempt to disprove their argument. I'm not sure he did, as I don't think brad made the claim Ichi appeared to think he'd made, but no matter what way you look at it, it wasn't an appeal to false authority. As in, not even remotely.

Ichy stated that his is a leading scientist.  Ichy then stated that the earth is flat.  Either he committed an appeal to false authority or he committed a non sequitur.  Either way, it was fallacious.

Wilmore doesn't understand fallacies, give it up. You only have to look at him trumpeting about the George Scott fallacy to see that.
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on January 11, 2012, 07:39:16 AM
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.
*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8904
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #34 on: February 29, 2012, 10:21:51 AM »
The comment before mine portrayed RET as supported by many scientists while FET is oppositely unsupported theories.
I disagree since I am a leading scientist and have supported FET.
Logged
Quote from: James on August 26, 2011, 05:40:53 AM
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #35 on: February 29, 2012, 11:44:02 AM »
Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on February 29, 2012, 10:21:51 AM
The comment before mine portrayed RET as supported by many scientists while FET is oppositely unsupported theories.
I disagree since I am a leading scientist and have supported FET.

Be that as it may, unless your area of expertise somehow deals with the shape of the earth, my contention that you are presenting yourself as a false authority stands.  Exposing fallacies in RE'er logic does not necessarily strengthen FET, especially when you commit the exact same fallacy.
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
?

Teddy II

  • 13
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #36 on: February 29, 2012, 11:48:16 AM »
From my point of view, it seems to be the shape of a rotting pineapple. But round seems to be the closest alternative.
Logged
?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #37 on: February 29, 2012, 02:12:15 PM »
Quote from: Ichimaru Gin :] on February 29, 2012, 10:21:51 AM
The comment before mine portrayed RET as supported by many scientists while FET is oppositely unsupported theories.
I disagree since I am a leading scientist and have supported FET.

You may hold the job of scientist in some fashion, but in terms of outlook and philosophy and observation of the world around you, you are no scientist at all. The massive amount of finger-in-ear data ignoring you have to do in order to support FET proves that. If you want to dispute that, I am happy to post a list of pieces of data you have to ignore or accuse of being false in order to support FET.
I'd be interested to see if you can find a list of data that has to be ignored or acused of falsity in order to support RET. Bet you can't. Inb4 Bedford Level Experiment, as it has been repeated more times showing curvature than it has showing flatness.
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on January 11, 2012, 07:39:16 AM
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #38 on: February 29, 2012, 03:46:17 PM »
Quote from: markjo on February 28, 2012, 09:25:42 PM
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on February 28, 2012, 08:54:29 PM
No, he wasn't. He was responding to another poster in an attempt to disprove their argument. I'm not sure he did, as I don't think brad made the claim Ichi appeared to think he'd made, but no matter what way you look at it, it wasn't an appeal to false authority. As in, not even remotely.

Ichy stated that his is a leading scientist.  Ichy then stated that the earth is flat.  Either he committed an appeal to false authority or he committed a non sequitur.  Either way, it was fallacious.


If his post was fallacious, it was fallacious only by virtue of the argument he was responding to. He did not alter the structure of the argument in any way, but merely offered evidence he felt contradicted the argument presented.
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #39 on: February 29, 2012, 04:01:31 PM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on February 29, 2012, 03:46:17 PM
If his post was fallacious, it was fallacious only by virtue of the argument he was responding to. He did not alter the structure of the argument in any way, but merely offered evidence he felt contradicted the argument presented.

So you're saying that the two fallacies (his and the one that he responded to) canceled each other out?  ???
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #40 on: February 29, 2012, 04:16:07 PM »
No, just that if fallacial logic was used, it was used by the poster he responded to. Responding to that argument in its own terms is not really committing the fallacy. One can object to or disprove a fallacial argument without challenging its fallacial nature.


For example, let's take the following hypothetical argument:


P1: All dogs have two legs.

P2: Socrates has two legs.

Therefore, Socrates is a dog.


Now, the argument is certainly fallacial, but I don't have to challenge its logical status to refute it. I can simply oppose the absurd P1 by presenting a four-legged dog. It doesn't mean I've committed the same fallacy as the person presenting the argument, or indeed any other fallacy. I'm simply objecting to one of the premises.
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #41 on: February 29, 2012, 06:56:16 PM »
Unfortunately, your example is not the same type of argument that Ichi responded to.  A better example would be:

    RE'er: Leading scientists (in undisclosed fields) say that the earth is round.
    FE'er: I'm a leading scientist (in an undisclosed field) and I say that the earth is flat.

Both statements are fallacious because neither has shown that any of the scientists are experts in any field of science that has anything to do with the shape of the earth.
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8904
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #42 on: March 01, 2012, 02:04:20 AM »
Unfortunetly, that wasn't the situation Markjo nor the premise I had a problem with.
Putting forth that scientists have support of RET while there is no support of FET is what I disagreed with.
Logged
Quote from: James on August 26, 2011, 05:40:53 AM
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?
?

iwanttobelieve

  • 5442
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #43 on: March 01, 2012, 09:04:11 AM »
its a giant disc, probably endless (until an edge can be verified)
Logged
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #44 on: March 05, 2012, 09:35:10 AM »
Quote from: markjo on February 29, 2012, 06:56:16 PM
Unfortunately, your example is not the same type of argument that Ichi responded to.  A better example would be:

    RE'er: Leading scientists (in undisclosed fields) say that the earth is round.
    FE'er: I'm a leading scientist (in an undisclosed field) and I say that the earth is flat.

Both statements are fallacious because neither has shown that any of the scientists are experts in any field of science that has anything to do with the shape of the earth.


What exactly is fallacious about the second statement? In isolation it's a statement of fact that disproves the first statement. That the first statement constituted a fallacious argument to begin with has no bearing on whether or not the second statement is fallacious.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2012, 04:55:56 PM by Lord Wilmore »
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #45 on: March 05, 2012, 01:11:17 PM »
Wilmore, don't forget you admitted today that a fallacious argument can still be correct.
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on January 11, 2012, 07:39:16 AM
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #46 on: March 05, 2012, 04:55:39 PM »
Quote from: The Knowledge on March 05, 2012, 01:11:17 PM
Wilmore, don't forget you admitted today that a fallacious argument can still be correct.


Strictly speaking, I said that someone could reach a conclusion that was true despite using a fallacious argument. In any event, I don't see why that's relevant here - markjo has simply accused Ichi of committing a fallacy which he simply did not.
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #47 on: March 05, 2012, 09:49:17 PM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on March 05, 2012, 09:35:10 AM
Quote from: markjo on February 29, 2012, 06:56:16 PM
Unfortunately, your example is not the same type of argument that Ichi responded to.  A better example would be:

    RE'er: Leading scientists (in undisclosed fields) say that the earth is round.
    FE'er: I'm a leading scientist (in an undisclosed field) and I say that the earth is flat.

Both statements are fallacious because neither has shown that any of the scientists are experts in any field of science that has anything to do with the shape of the earth.


What exactly is fallacious about the second statement? In isolation it's a statement of fact that disproves the first statement. That the first statement constituted a fallacious argument to begin with has no bearing on whether or not the second statement is fallacious.

The second statement is just as fallacious as the first because neither "scientist" has shown that their area of expertise has anything to do with the shape of the earth.  Or are you suggesting that appeal to false authority fallacy does not apply to claims that the earth is flat?
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #48 on: March 06, 2012, 09:29:31 AM »
Quote from: markjo on March 05, 2012, 09:49:17 PM
The second statement is just as fallacious as the first because neither "scientist" has shown that their area of expertise has anything to do with the shape of the earth.  Or are you suggesting that appeal to false authority fallacy does not apply to claims that the earth is flat?


But Ichi never claimed that it did. All he claimed to have done was disprove a premise of the orginal fallacious argument. Doing so does not involve committing the fallacy in question.
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #49 on: March 06, 2012, 11:19:44 AM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on March 06, 2012, 09:29:31 AM
Quote from: markjo on March 05, 2012, 09:49:17 PM
The second statement is just as fallacious as the first because neither "scientist" has shown that their area of expertise has anything to do with the shape of the earth.  Or are you suggesting that appeal to false authority fallacy does not apply to claims that the earth is flat?


But Ichi never claimed that it did. All he claimed to have done was disprove a premise of the orginal fallacious argument. Doing so does not involve committing the fallacy in question.

How did Ichi disprove the premise of the original fallacious argument? 
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #50 on: March 06, 2012, 01:50:13 PM »
Quote from: markjo on March 06, 2012, 11:19:44 AM
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on March 06, 2012, 09:29:31 AM
Quote from: markjo on March 05, 2012, 09:49:17 PM
The second statement is just as fallacious as the first because neither "scientist" has shown that their area of expertise has anything to do with the shape of the earth.  Or are you suggesting that appeal to false authority fallacy does not apply to claims that the earth is flat?


But Ichi never claimed that it did. All he claimed to have done was disprove a premise of the orginal fallacious argument. Doing so does not involve committing the fallacy in question.

How did Ichi disprove the premise of the original fallacious argument?


Quote from: Lord Wilmore on February 28, 2012, 08:54:29 PM
I'm not sure he did, as I don't think brad made the claim Ichi appeared to think he'd made, but no matter what way you look at it, it wasn't an appeal to false authority.
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #51 on: March 06, 2012, 02:54:43 PM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on March 06, 2012, 01:50:13 PM
Quote from: markjo on March 06, 2012, 11:19:44 AM
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on March 06, 2012, 09:29:31 AM
Quote from: markjo on March 05, 2012, 09:49:17 PM
The second statement is just as fallacious as the first because neither "scientist" has shown that their area of expertise has anything to do with the shape of the earth.  Or are you suggesting that appeal to false authority fallacy does not apply to claims that the earth is flat?


But Ichi never claimed that it did. All he claimed to have done was disprove a premise of the orginal fallacious argument. Doing so does not involve committing the fallacy in question.

How did Ichi disprove the premise of the original fallacious argument?


Quote from: Lord Wilmore on February 28, 2012, 08:54:29 PM
I'm not sure he did, as I don't think brad made the claim Ichi appeared to think he'd made, but no matter what way you look at it, it wasn't an appeal to false authority.

All of this is irrelevant, because Wilmore has admitted an argument can be totally gobbledegook but the claimant can still be correct.
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on January 11, 2012, 07:39:16 AM
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.
*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #52 on: March 06, 2012, 03:06:23 PM »
Quote from: The Knowledge on March 06, 2012, 02:54:43 PM
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on March 06, 2012, 01:50:13 PM
Quote from: markjo on March 06, 2012, 11:19:44 AM
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on March 06, 2012, 09:29:31 AM
Quote from: markjo on March 05, 2012, 09:49:17 PM
The second statement is just as fallacious as the first because neither "scientist" has shown that their area of expertise has anything to do with the shape of the earth.  Or are you suggesting that appeal to false authority fallacy does not apply to claims that the earth is flat?


But Ichi never claimed that it did. All he claimed to have done was disprove a premise of the orginal fallacious argument. Doing so does not involve committing the fallacy in question.

How did Ichi disprove the premise of the original fallacious argument?


Quote from: Lord Wilmore on February 28, 2012, 08:54:29 PM
I'm not sure he did, as I don't think brad made the claim Ichi appeared to think he'd made, but no matter what way you look at it, it wasn't an appeal to false authority.

All of this is irrelevant, because Wilmore has admitted an argument can be totally gobbledegook but the claimant can still be correct.

What you're referring to is Wilmore's reference to a logical fallacy which states that just because someone believes something for bad reasons doesn't mean what they believe in is incorrect. For example, if I think someone is in my house hiding in my closet, the fact that I believe it based on noticing the door being open (which in this analogy, was caused by a gust of wind) does not mean that it's impossible that there is someone hiding in my closet with a knife.
Logged
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #53 on: March 06, 2012, 04:55:38 PM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on March 06, 2012, 01:50:13 PM
Quote from: markjo on March 06, 2012, 11:19:44 AM
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on March 06, 2012, 09:29:31 AM
Quote from: markjo on March 05, 2012, 09:49:17 PM
The second statement is just as fallacious as the first because neither "scientist" has shown that their area of expertise has anything to do with the shape of the earth.  Or are you suggesting that appeal to false authority fallacy does not apply to claims that the earth is flat?


But Ichi never claimed that it did. All he claimed to have done was disprove a premise of the orginal fallacious argument. Doing so does not involve committing the fallacy in question.

How did Ichi disprove the premise of the original fallacious argument?


Quote from: Lord Wilmore on February 28, 2012, 08:54:29 PM
I'm not sure he did, as I don't think brad made the claim Ichi appeared to think he'd made, but no matter what way you look at it, it wasn't an appeal to false authority.

If Ichi is using his status as a "leading scientist" to disprove the claim that the earth is round and his field of expertise has nothing to do with the shape of the earth, then I don't see how it isn't an appeal to (his own) false authority.
Logged
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #54 on: March 07, 2012, 09:22:58 AM »
Quote from: markjo on March 06, 2012, 04:55:38 PM
If Ichi is using his status as a "leading scientist" to disprove the claim that the earth is round and his field of expertise has nothing to do with the shape of the earth, then I don't see how it isn't an appeal to (his own) false authority.


But he isn't doing that! He was using it to disprove the (perceived) claim that no leading scientists think that the Earth is flat.


Quote from: The Knowledge on March 06, 2012, 02:54:43 PM
All of this is irrelevant, because Wilmore has admitted an argument can be totally gobbledegook but the claimant can still be correct.


So? Seriously, do you actually understand the point I was making? It's not controvertial - it's as simple as saying that people can be right for the wrong reasons. If there's a question on a maths test, I can go about it completely the wrong way but still by fluke get the correct answer. We can arrest a man for a crime based on completely invalid or fabricated evidence, but it might turn out that he confesses because he actually did it. Similarly, you can use a really stupid, utterly fallacious argument that is completely lacking in evidence, but by chance reach a conclusion that is nevertheless true.


This is simple stuff, and I don't understand why you think it's argumentatively compromising or embarrassing for me. In any event, it has nothing to do with the topic at hand, so if you want to discuss it further, create a topic in the Philosophy board and stop cross-pollinating your ignorance.
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #55 on: March 07, 2012, 09:54:33 AM »
I didn't say it was supposed to be embarrassing or argumentatively compromising, you arrogant man. I merely stated that since whether one argues with a fallacy or without a fallacy doesn't have any bearing on one's correctness, as you admit, carrying on for page after page after page about whether people are arguing fallaciously or not is utterly pointless and if I was a mod I would consider it derailment.
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on January 11, 2012, 07:39:16 AM
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #56 on: March 07, 2012, 11:18:32 AM »
Quote from: The Knowledge on March 07, 2012, 09:54:33 AM
I didn't say it was supposed to be embarrassing or argumentatively compromising, you arrogant man. I merely stated that since whether one argues with a fallacy or without a fallacy doesn't have any bearing on one's correctness, as you admit, carrying on for page after page after page about whether people are arguing fallaciously or not is utterly pointless and if I was a mod I would consider it derailment.


Just because bad arguments can by fluke lead to a valid conclusion, does not mean we should let people get away with bad arguments. By your reasoning, all debate and discussion is pointless.


I don't agree with markjo that Ichi's point was fallacious, but if it were, it would be absolutely legitimate of him to point it out. Nothing good comes from a bad argument.
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #57 on: March 07, 2012, 04:11:51 PM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on March 07, 2012, 11:18:32 AM
Quote from: The Knowledge on March 07, 2012, 09:54:33 AM
I didn't say it was supposed to be embarrassing or argumentatively compromising, you arrogant man. I merely stated that since whether one argues with a fallacy or without a fallacy doesn't have any bearing on one's correctness, as you admit, carrying on for page after page after page about whether people are arguing fallaciously or not is utterly pointless and if I was a mod I would consider it derailment.


Just because bad arguments can by fluke lead to a valid conclusion, does not mean we should let people get away with bad arguments. By your reasoning, all debate and discussion is pointless.


The stuff you have been reduced to debating is pointless as it matters so infinitesimally little. Honestly, whether Ichi is or is not "a leading scientist" has so little bearing on the shape of the earth it's really not worth bothering with.
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on January 11, 2012, 07:39:16 AM
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #58 on: March 07, 2012, 09:09:53 PM »
Quote from: The Knowledge on March 07, 2012, 04:11:51 PM
The stuff you have been reduced to debating is pointless as it matters so infinitesimally little.


But who has reduced us to debating it? RE'ers. The original point was made by a RE'er, and the subsequent dispute over Ichi's (non) fallacious claim was also started by a RE'er. I agree that Ichi's status as a leading scientist has nothing to do with the shape of the Earth, but I didn't claim it did to begin with (and neither did he).
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Shape of the earth?
« Reply #59 on: March 08, 2012, 03:35:47 AM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on March 07, 2012, 09:09:53 PM
Quote from: The Knowledge on March 07, 2012, 04:11:51 PM
The stuff you have been reduced to debating is pointless as it matters so infinitesimally little.


But who has reduced us to debating it? RE'ers. The original point was made by a RE'er, and the subsequent dispute over Ichi's (non) fallacious claim was also started by a RE'er. I agree that Ichi's status as a leading scientist has nothing to do with the shape of the Earth, but I didn't claim it did to begin with (and neither did he).

TBH it's six of one, half a dozen of the other. A debate can only happen with more than one side engaged in it.
Logged
Quote from: John Davis on January 11, 2012, 07:39:16 AM
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
« previous next »