Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Oh Brother

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Harvey on February 23, 2002 05:58:56 UTC

Mike, Mike, Mike. I'll respond just for the heck of it:

***Harv posts no qualifications ever and uses only his first name. Real openness.***

Deal with it.

***In my opinion, his "god and science" posts are long vague things usually, and filled with "hinge terms" which keep any sentence from being evaluated as a logical assertion.***

This is because you have yet to post any coherent arguments so this perhaps explains why you cannot recognize one. I know, I shouldn't be so blunt, but it happens to be correct.

***In my opinion, Harv mainly weasel words. The right word makes a point. A weasel word makes it seem something was said, but it's very hard to find what it was -- if not impossible.***

Contrary to your opinion, arguments can only be substantiated by logical argument. If you doubt that I'm giving a logical argument, then simply ask for clarification. You've simply backed down in every argument we've had and resorted to well-known logical fallacies (e.g., ad hominem arguments) - just like you are doing now by the way.

***I have made pointed suggestions how Harv could actually write instead of just typing baloney. Some others have suggested Harv is out of this world, too.***

Hey, I'm here to defend my views and change them when shown to be in error. However, if that means I'm gonna change my view because someone argues from a fallacy (such as how you argue), then I have no interest in that.

***When he was right, I supported it, such as when he suggested photon acceleration is an exception to Newtonian equations on acceleration.***

Being right is not something that you can decide. What decides being right is the content of the argument that is based on sound reasoning and use of evidence. You simply are not fully committed to this process but would rather take cheap shots to argue your case. I don't care if a 100 people support fallacies, all that means to me is a 100 people are wrong.

***But Harv also has a tendency to simply stonewall rather than be honest in ordinary dialogue. He should admit he has been very mistaken and very much lacks knowledge in some basic areas, and that he had been deceptive in trying to avoid admitting when he was mistaken. Anything short of this just continues the pretense that he is corresponding in an honest way with the forum as a whole.***

Stonewall? It is called defending one's views using evidence and sound argument. Stonewalling is defeatable by showing how it contradicts itself. If it cannot be contradicted or made to appear non-sensical, then you can call it what you want, but it is probably good argumentation.

***Mario has twice volunteered to respond to
me in a topic area, then virtually dropped the ball. Now Mario is "helping" Harv in this little
volley. Who are you, Mario?***

See, this is your well known and obvious tactic to avoid content. Just concentrate on the person. Don't know their last name? Then make that an issue. Don't know their educational background? Then surely that's the issue. Don't know their credit card numbers and social security numbers, then aha! we have the culprit in why this person is wrong.

Just admit it Mike. You have absolutely no interest in content and are only absorbed in using logical fallacies when you get into arguments that require too much of effort to engage.

Warm regards, Harv

(Someone uses warm regards at the end of their posts? Then surely that's the reason why they are wrong - silly rabbit, tricks are for kids).

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins