More Strong Evidence for Evolution: Anatomical Vestiges

[Sherlock Holmes]

A non sequitur, meant to convolute and direct the original material into a different direction not or8ginally intended by either person.

Yawn. Your tactics are so tired. You and Seymour flops should be locked in a room together, where you might be able to create a rhetorical wormhole to another dimension.

A weird little lie, as my case did not rely on mocking your tactics at all. That was bonus material.

I bet you can't argue with me without getting personal.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I bet you can't argue with me without getting personal.

I already have. So, how much money are you sending me?

It's pretty funny to watch you retreat to characterization, which itself consists of accusing everyone else of doing the same.

Another tired charlatans tactic.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

From the BBC: Logical fallacies: Seven ways to spot a bad argument

 

[ding]

I already have. So, how much money are you sending me?

It's pretty funny to watch you retreat to characterization, which itself consists of accusing everyone else of doing the same.

Another tired charlatans tactic.

It's almost as if you crave drama and conflict. Is this how you behave in real life too?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I already have. So, how much money are you sending me?

It's pretty funny to watch you retreat to characterization, which itself consists of accusing everyone else of doing the same.

Another tired charlatans tactic.

QED - See, I told you, you can't argue without attacking me in some way.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

From the BBC: Logical fallacies: Seven ways to spot a bad argument

View attachment 1004330

Oops, looks like you don't know what ad hominem is.

I made my argument. Mocking your tactics was not germane to it.

Therefore, not ad hominem. It's always easy to tell the college educated folks from the internet message board educated folks.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's almost as if you crave drama and conflict. Is this how you behave in real life too?

And this concludes the off topic crybabying.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

QED - See, I told you, you can't argue without attacking me in some way.

That doesn't prove your point.

If i argue that dogs have 3 legs, then I find 2 dogs with 3 legs, have I proven my point?

No.

So what you are saying amounts to a lie.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Oops, looks like you don't know what ad hominem is.

I made my argument. Mocking your tactics was not germane to it.

Then why do it?

Therefore, not ad hominem. It's always easy to tell the college educated folks from the internet message board educated folks.

There you go again, mocking my presumed lack of education, that's ad-hominem.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

That doesn't prove your point.

If i argue that dogs have 3 legs, then I find 2 dogs with 3 legs, have I proven my point?

No.

So what you are saying amounts to a lie.

Again, an ad-hominem attack is always there.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Then why do it?

Because that is what it deserves. It's specious and dishonest. Your tactics are tired and dishonest. I have explained why. I have crafted analogies. I have been very detailed.

But that's not what you want to talk about.

I think we both know why.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Again, an ad-hominem attack is always there.

Calling an idea a lie is not ad hominem. Especially when that assertion is the conclusion of an argument.

 

[ding]

And this concludes the off topic crybabying.

From the perspective of a demanding parent or spoiled child. Yes.

You seek drama and conflict like a moth seeks a light.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

They will.tire out soon enough.

And all the arguments will still be here waiting for them.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Because that is what it deserves. It's specious and dishonest. Your tactics are tired and dishonest. I have explained why. I have crafted analogies. I have been very detailed.

That's more ad-hominem.

I've debated with people online for many many years and have learned a great deal. The ad-hominem is always used to try and distract the audience. By distracting the audience, the protagonist can divert attention away from their own weak argument, it's that simple, that's why it's done. Those with a strong confident case have no need to try and distract the audience.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That's more ad-hominem.

False. You clearly do not know what this term means and should stop using it immediately.

I'm sure you HAVE used this specious tactic many times, when others have perfectly described why your tactics are specious and dishonest.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Calling an idea a lie is not ad hominem. Especially when that assertion is the conclusion of an argument.

But saying what you did: "So what you are saying amounts to a lie"

Is ad-hominem, it's telling people I am a liar and on that basis to stop listening to me, it's designed to distract.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But saying what you did: "So what you are saying amounts to a lie"

Right. I called an assertion a lie, and described precisely why it is a lie.

That's far from ad hominem. It's a compelling argument that you cannot meet.

So you retreat to characterization.

And it is every time.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

False.

True, this is what you said and it is an ad-hominem attack:

"Because that is what it deserves. It's specious and dishonest. Your tactics are tired and dishonest. I have explained why. I have crafted analogies. I have been very detailed."

You clearly do not know what this term means and should stop using it immediately.

I'm sure you HAVE used this specious tactic many times, when others have perfectly described why your tactics are specious and dishonest.

And on and on we go - attack the man, attack his honesty, attack his character and integrity.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Right. I called an assertion a lie, and described precisely why it is a lie.

That's far from ad hominem. It's a compelling argument that you cannot meet.

A lie means I am intentionally, knowingly making a false assertion.

So you retreat to characterization.

And it is every time.

Debate without attacking me please, if you can't then I think people can draw their own conclusions about who's integrity is in doubt.