It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Unjustified Hatred of Donald Trump

page: 33
120
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Speculative fallacy




posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

How so?



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It starts with "Imagine if".



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Is it against the rules to speak in such a way?



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   



he knows words, he has the best words.......from last winter. February.

You people are forgetting everything you know.


edit on 11/3/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Spreading other people's thoughts in place of your own.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Says the person always quick to point out fallacies in other peoples posts.

Another example of the H word.




edit on 3-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

What is wrong with pointing out fallacies?

It's just that you never told me what was wrong with saying Imagine if.
edit on 3-11-2016 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I never said there was anything wrong with pointing out fallacies

It is just an example of you being hypocritical. I actually don't think that is good or bad. It just is. There is, and I never said there was, anything wrong in saying imagine if.

I would think that someone quick to point out fallacies would be just as quick to see them in their own posts.

Hypothesis Contrary to Fact (also known as: counterfactual fallacy, speculative fallacy, "what if" fallacy, wouldchuck)


Description: Offering a poorly supported claim about what might have happened in the past or future, if (the hypothetical part) circumstances or conditions were different. The fallacy also entails treating future hypothetical situations as if they are fact.

edit on 3-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

I never treated it as fact. I was speculating, hence the words, "imagine if" and "I wager". There is nothing fallacious about speculating.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You were making an argument that "The problem is, as I have stated, is others telling us what to think, to the point where we are no more than the vectors of someone else's propaganda."

You assume that is true in TzarChasm's case, although you can't say, then you offer speculation as if that makes the above statement true.

You offer no other basis for the veracity of your statement so, you are giving this speculation as basis or making baseless accusations, which is about where we started, isn't it?



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

I said "we", which is plural. I didn't assume it was true in TzarChasm's case, hence the speculation. Baseless accusations appears to be your game.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Including "We" doesn't make the statement any truer than if you had directed it at someone specifically.

You can't shimmy fast enough to wiggle out of it.

Baseless accusations can be my game all day long but this is an example you doing that, or using speculation as a basis, either way your statement is "unjustified".
edit on 3-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik



Including "We" doesn't make the statement any truer than if you had directed it at someone specifically.

You can't shimmy fast enough to wiggle out of it.

Baseless accusations can be my game all day long but this is an example you doing that, or using speculation as a basis, either way your statement is "unjustified".


Who have I accused? First it was TsarChasm, not it is...whom?
edit on 3-11-2016 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

If you can't see it then nobody is going to convince you. That has already been shown in this and many other threads.

All we can do is point at you and say look at old LesMis acting like he is infallible, poor sap. Oh, I'm just speculating that!
edit on 3-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




If you can't see it then nobody is going to convince you. That has already been shown in this and many other threads.

All we can do is point at you and say look at old LesMis acting like he is infallible, poor sap. Oh, I'm just speculating that!


You said I'm making baseless accusations, but will not say who I'm accusing. Looks like another baseless accusation.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

No, you made a broad accusation. They are your words, you don't know who they were describing?

Asking "who?" is playing dumb.
edit on 3-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

First I was accusing an individual, now it's a broad accusation. You're about as consistent as oatmeal.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: TzarChasm

The problem is, as I have stated, is others telling us what to think, to the point where we are no more than the vectors of someone else's propaganda. I will defend Trump and any heretic from the unscrupulous mob, but I will not campaign for him.

If you've heard his side of the story from a media that offers 90% of his coverage as negative, I might have a good idea why you're less impressed. Imagine if someone like John Oliver, who uses a staff of researchers and writers, wrote a balanced piece. I wager you'd be singing a different tune.


I've heard all sorts of things from all sorts of sources. Didn't think you were the gambling type, but if I were you, I wouldn't start there. Hopefully you won't have to eat your words. As I said before, you are right: the hatred is unjustified. Hatred is an absolutely terrible thing to waste time and energy on. Fear, on the other hand, is a perfectly reasonable reaction. We should be very wary of the Donald, in my opinion. A business shark is not what we need as a nation. Again, in my opinion.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
First I was accusing an individual, now it's a broad accusation. You're about as consistent as oatmeal.

I stated that TzarChasm was included in your accusation. I said that you could not be sure if he was part of the group you were accusing.

You assume that is true in TzarChasm's case


The problem isn't my consistency but your overly-formal approach to communication. Either that or you are just playing dumb.


edit on 3-11-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
120
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join