or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Gorebot 2008!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gorebot 2008! - Page 5

post #161 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
1) It wasn't me making the statements.

2) It doesn't matter. Argue the issue, not the person.


Sorry Chris but you are arguing in the other direction so I have to engage you.

The thing is your arguments have no substance behind them.

You apparently just like to argue.

If you gave a sufficent amount of facts or theories from experts in the other direction you'd have something but you don't.

You submit one link from an little known paper in the face of hundreds of references to this subject on the web that say the opposite. So chances are in the face of all that data they're right!

When you start arguing the issue with substance I'll consider it.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #162 of 191
Chris how old are you? Did you attend college? Did you take chemistry or physics in high school?
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #163 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
The thing is your arguments have no substance behind them.

a) They weren't my arguments.

b) No one here has actually challenged the arguments themselves.

Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
If you gave a sufficent amount of facts or theories from experts in the other direction you'd have something but you don't.

Evidentally you are completely lost or have forgotten the original article that started this little rabbit trail.

Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
You submit one link from an little known paper in the face of hundreds of references to this subject on the web that say the opposite.

And yet, no one has actually addressed the claims made in the article.

Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
When you start arguing the issue with substance I'll consider it.

You haven't even argued the issue. WHy should I believe you at this point?
post #164 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by Aquatic
Chris how old are you? Did you attend college? Did you take chemistry or physics in high school?

Since you insist on using ad hominem, I'm finished.

If you actually care to address the claims (not the scientists themselves) made by the scientists in the article, then we might have something interesting to discuss.
post #165 of 191
Actually, Chris is absolutely correct in this. All of the responses have addressed HIM and not the arguments made by the person he's referencing.

With that said, I should point out that it is significant that the terms of this "debate" are, for everyone invoved, rhetorical, since in the end, none of us know enough about it to argue coherently, anyway (with perhaps a couple of exceptions).

Rhetoric does not equal truth, and being able to argue something convincingly via rhetoric does not make your position true. Similarly, a layperson not being able to prove or disprove a scientific theory does not make the theory true or false.

We've seen this tactic before in Intelligent Design.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #166 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Actually, Chris is absolutely correct in this. All of the responses have addressed HIM and not the arguments made by the person he's referencing.

With that said, I should point out that it is significant that the terms of this "debate" are, for everyone invoved, rhetorical, since in the end, none of us know enough about it to argue coherently, anyway (with perhaps a couple of exceptions).

Rhetoric does not equal truth, and being able to argue something convincingly via rhetoric does not make your position true. Similarly, a layperson not being able to prove or disprove a scientific theory does not make the theory true or false.

We've seen this tactic before in Intelligent Design.


Yes midwinter that's why we turn to links. To the people who are versed on the subject at hand.

When someone offers as evidence one source from an obscure site I know enough to say " Well do you have anything else? How about a well known site like CNN, a scientific journal etc. "

This is exactly what these guys did in another thread. Demanding futher proof from a well known site. And lots of it since there's a mountain of evidence on the other side. But of course Chris would rather stay away from logic and just argue because he's just right.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #167 of 191
To effectively address an argument you must first address the credibility of the person making it.
post #168 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by Placebo
To effectively address an argument you must first address the credibility of the person making it.

You are making an incorrect assumption. That is completely unnecessary in fact (unless you cannot argue the claims).

Go back to the "water is like feldspar" thing mentioned upthread for an example.
post #169 of 191
You get it for me. I'm tired.
post #170 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by Placebo
To effectively address an argument you must first address the credibility of the person making it.

That is a genetic fallacy. You address arguments, not the people making them.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #171 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
You are making an incorrect assumption. That is completely unnecessary in fact (unless you cannot argue the claims).

Go back to the "water is like feldspar" thing mentioned upthread for an example.

Research is discredited all the time. Some sources are no good. The quality of one's sources is important, which is why the bibliography was invented.

If I cited David Irving in a paper on the holocaust, say, you would be entitled to question on my sources.

Maybe I should repeat this post in italics, say, or in a different font size, or just repeat it a dozen times.

Maybe I should just give up? Yeah, it's only the internet.
post #172 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Research is discredited all the time. Some sources are no good. The quality of one's sources is important, which is why the bibliography was invented.

If I cited David Irving in a paper on the holocaust, say, you would be entitled to question on my sources.

Maybe I should repeat this post in italics, say, or in a different font size, or just repeat it a dozen times.

Maybe I should just give up? Yeah, it's only the internet.

What y'all are doing is not discrediting research. You're discrediting Chris.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #173 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
That is a genetic fallacy.

Is that like those frogs that grow extra sets of legs because of pollution?

Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
That is a genetic fallacy. You address arguments, not the people making them.

I'm not arguing, I'm hating on Chris. I never said I was arguing.
post #174 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by Placebo
I'm not arguing, I'm hating on Chris. I never said I was arguing. [/B]

Oh! Well then! Nevermind me! That's totally different.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #175 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by Placebo
I'm not arguing, I'm hating on Chris. I never said I was arguing.

I truly appreciate the honesty. Can respect it too.
post #176 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
I truly appreciate the honesty. Can respect it too.

I'm sure you do "appreciate" it. Tell us, Chris, what kinds of qualifications do you have for appreciating? Do you have a degree in appreciation?

Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #177 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
I'm sure you do "appreciate" it. Tell us, Chris, what kinds of qualifications do you have for appreciating? Do you have a degree in appreciation?


Love and kisses.
post #178 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
I'm sure you do "appreciate" it. Tell us, Chris, what kinds of qualifications do you have for appreciating? Do you have a degree in appreciation?


Yes I know it was a joke but not the same thing.

Everyone can appreciate or not. It's built in.

Not everyone can speak with authority on a complex subject like Global Warming. Not with out taking some classes.

I certainly can't. But I know enough to see that what 99 % of the experts out there are saying makes sense. Since 1990 we've had the worldwide the hottest years on record. So if it isn't real then it should start cooling down shouldn't it? The ice caps should stop melting shouldn't they? I live in Oregon and in my brief time ( 53 years ) I've seen man strip the trees from mountain sides. It's not to hard to believe with all the change man has wrought here that we have some larger effect.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #179 of 191
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
Yes I know it was a joke but not the same thing.

Everyone can appreciate or not. It's built in.

Not everyone can speak with authority on a complex subject like Global Warming. Not with out taking some classes.

I certainly can't. But I know enough to see that what 99 % of the experts out there are saying makes sense. Since 1990 we've had the worldwide the hottest years on record. So if it isn't real then it should start cooling down shouldn't it? The ice caps should stop melting shouldn't they? I live in Oregon and in my brief time ( 53 years ) I've seen man strip the trees from mountain sides. It's not to hard to believe with all the change man has wrought here that we have some larger effect.

Of course it's not hard to believe. That doesn't mean it's happening.

That said, this discussion is a prime example of what happens when someone indicates he is not convinced that global warming exists and not convinced that it's driven by human activity. That person is attacked, dismissed, called an idiot and generally piled on. It happens not just here, but everywhere. While it is true that the majority of scientists agree on global warming, it is also true that a...ahem...significant number (that's for you, jimmac! ) disagree. There are also problems with the general argument for global warming's existence, namely that the Earth warms and cools within certain parameters over thousands and hundreds of thousands of years.

So Chris, you should really give this one up. These guys are not about to change their minds.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #180 of 191
Chris, you ignored this post. It was really good.

I hope you don't think I'm making an 'ad hominem attack' when I say that I believe that this post deserves a response from you.

Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
I want you to look into the concept of "appeal to reasonable authority".

It's how we can "know" things with some confidence, without having to become experts in every field that we seek to have knowledge of.

For instance, if I am obliged to have a degree in astrophysics, to "authoritatively" refute the statement " interstellar space is filled with dense clouds of neon", than I am at a real disadvantage, "knowledge" wise, at least if I seek to have a generalist's overview of the world. The same principle would apply to, say, my being able to refute holocaust deniers without I, myself, having done definitive original research.

If, on the other hand, I may confidently point to the consensus opinion of astrophysicists, who are pretty uniform in the finding that interstellar space is, in fact, not filled with dense clouds of neon, than I have a much better chance of forming a coherent picture of the world.

Ditto the consensus opinion of historians, chemists, roofers, dentists, barge captains and lute players.

That is, people of whom I have a reasonable expectation to possess specialized knowledge acquired through study or experience.

Now, if you are saying that in refuting a falsehood by appeal to reasonable authority I am obliged to educate the holder of the falsehood on the state of consensus of reasonable authority and present some arbitrary amount of documentation attesting to same, then I shall call you a tedious ninny and move on.
post #181 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Of course it's not hard to believe. That doesn't mean it's happening.

That said, this discussion is a prime example of what happens when someone indicates he is not convinced that global warming exists and not convinced that it's driven by human activity. That person is attacked, dismissed, called an idiot and generally piled on. It happens not just here, but everywhere. While it is true that the majority of scientists agree on global warming, it is also true that a...ahem...significant number (that's for you, jimmac! ) disagree. There are also problems with the general argument for global warming's existence, namely that the Earth warms and cools within certain parameters over thousands and hundreds of thousands of years.

So Chris, you should really give this one up. These guys are not about to change their minds.


The thing is SDW there is much more reason to believe than to not believe. The evidence is mounting year after year. Now if there was an equal amount of evidence counter to this you might have something. But it's not even close to that. So again it's one of those things where it's much more likely to be right.


Imagine you're standing on the tracks. Something is seen in the distance. It looks like a train. It sounds like a train. It even smells like a train. You can feel the vibration just like a train would make. Another man is standing on the tracks also and says " What are you worried about? You act like that's a train. " So what are you going to do?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #182 of 191
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
The thing is SDW there is much more reason to believe than to not believe. The evidence is mounting year after year. Now if there was an equal amount of evidence counter to this you might have something. But it's not even close to that. So again it's one of those things where it's much more likely to be right.


Imagine you're standing on the tracks. Something is seen in the distance. It looks like a train. It sounds like a train. It even smells like a train. You can feel the vibration just like a train would make. Another man is standing on the tracks also and says " What are you worried about? You act like that's a train. " So what are you going to do?

I disagree that the evidence is mounting year after year. The predictions are moutning year after year. The hysteria is moutning year after year. Your perception of Global Warming's impact mounts year after year.

Your argument is that it's more likely than not. I really don't accept that. You can't get around the Earth's normal warming and cooling cycles. As for the train anaolgy, well one of the reasons folks like you think there is a train is that there are people on the sides of the tracks screaming "TRAIN!!!" 24 hours a day even though they really don't know for sure there is one. So naturally you feell the ground shaking and you start to think "hmmm...is there a train coming? Yes, I think so."
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #183 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
I disagree that the evidence is mounting year after year. The predictions are moutning year after year. The hysteria is moutning year after year. Your perception of Global Warming's impact mounts year after year.

Your argument is that it's more likely than not. I really don't accept that. You can't get around the Earth's normal warming and cooling cycles. As for the train anaolgy, well one of the reasons folks like you think there is a train is that there are people on the sides of the tracks screaming "TRAIN!!!" 24 hours a day even though they really don't know for sure there is one. So naturally you feell the ground shaking and you start to think "hmmm...is there a train coming? Yes, I think so."


Gee! What a surprise!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #184 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Chris, you ignored this post. It was really good.

I hope you don't think I'm making an 'ad hominem attack' when I say that I believe that this post deserves a response from you.

Oh look. Chris completely ignored the one post he should most have addressed. The one post that best gave the lie to his claims of ad hom.

Bravery! Integrity! A desire to engage in genuine debate!
post #185 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
I disagree that the evidence is mounting year after year. The predictions are moutning year after year. The hysteria is moutning year after year. Your perception of Global Warming's impact mounts year after year.

Your argument is that it's more likely than not. I really don't accept that. You can't get around the Earth's normal warming and cooling cycles. As for the train anaolgy, well one of the reasons folks like you think there is a train is that there are people on the sides of the tracks screaming "TRAIN!!!" 24 hours a day even though they really don't know for sure there is one. So naturally you feell the ground shaking and you start to think "hmmm...is there a train coming? Yes, I think so."

You forgot to mention this is an " opinion piece ".
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #186 of 191
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
You forgot to mention this is an " opinion piece ".

Yes it is. It's posted on this thing called a "bulletin board" where people share their "opinions." Good work, jimmac.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #187 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Yes it is. It's posted on this thing called a "bulletin board" where people share their "opinions." Good work, jimmac.


Yes but you speak it like it's gospel. Even when it's amazingly easy to poke holes in it.


You like the word " Hysteria " don't you?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #188 of 191
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
Yes but you speak it like it's gospel. Even when it's amazingly easy to poke holes in it.


You like the word " Hysteria " don't you?

I post my opinion. I don't know how someone does that "like it's gospel." Seems to me that's your perception, which is your problem.

As for it being amazingly easy to poke holes in: Well that is...wait for it.....hysterical! I want you to make sure you read the following clearly and slowly: In the years I've known you, you've never once been able to "poke holes" in anything I've ever posted. Your arguments are illogical, ill-supported and based on personal anecdotal experience rather than any sort of data and/or fact. While linking like a madman to CNN All Politics, you seem interested in only one thing: Having other leftist anti-Bushies here on AI agree with you so you can feel better about yourself.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #189 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
While linking like a madman to CNN All Politics, you seem interested in only one thing: Having other leftist anti-Bushies here on AI agree with you so you can feel better about yourself.

Pheeewww. Was starting to get worried since you'd forgotten to include the words left or leftist in a couple of your posts. No worries. No need for hysteria. Everything's fine.
post #190 of 191
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
Pheeewww. Was starting to get worried since you'd forgotten to include the words left or leftist in a couple of your posts. No worries. No need for hysteria. Everything's fine.

Yep, it's still me. No worries.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #191 of 191
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
I post my opinion. I don't know how someone does that "like it's gospel." Seems to me that's your perception, which is your problem.

As for it being amazingly easy to poke holes in: Well that is...wait for it.....hysterical! I want you to make sure you read the following clearly and slowly: In the years I've known you, you've never once been able to "poke holes" in anything I've ever posted. Your arguments are illogical, ill-supported and based on personal anecdotal experience rather than any sort of data and/or fact. While linking like a madman to CNN All Politics, you seem interested in only one thing: Having other leftist anti-Bushies here on AI agree with you so you can feel better about yourself.

It's the times SDW! " They are a changin "

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Gorebot 2008!