Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Hall" wrote in message ... On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:24:57 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: You need to look up the logical fallacy "Argumentum ad Ignorantiam" Here, I'll do it for you: http://www.philosophy.eku.edu/Willia...sec-web.htm#10 http://www.fallacyfiles.org/ignorant.html Dave So, after all this, are you saying you don't think a single person in Washington presented a workable, covert idea to your leader? It's certainly possible. You seem hell bent to deny that possibility. Dave No. What I'm saying is that a solution which did not involve big explosions and troop movements suitable for good photographs would not serve his own personal needs, even if a quieter, sneakier method was 100% successful as planned. Of course, I can't prove this, but you've got to admit that some people do things flashy, and some reach the same goal in more subtle ways. I find his way disgusting, especially since he's happy to throw away so many young lives, all in the name of an adrenaline rush. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:29:04 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:24:57 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: You need to look up the logical fallacy "Argumentum ad Ignorantiam" Here, I'll do it for you: http://www.philosophy.eku.edu/Willia...sec-web.htm#10 http://www.fallacyfiles.org/ignorant.html Dave So, after all this, are you saying you don't think a single person in Washington presented a workable, covert idea to your leader? It's certainly possible. You seem hell bent to deny that possibility. Dave No. What I'm saying is that a solution which did not involve big explosions and troop movements suitable for good photographs would not serve his own personal needs, even if a quieter, sneakier method was 100% successful as planned. Once again, you are presupposing a premise, which is borne solely from your personal opinion, and then assigning it as fact, and then using it to justify your own conclusion. You don't want me to give you yet another lesson on logical fallacies do you? Of course, I can't prove this..... Key statement. , but you've got to admit that some people do things flashy, and some reach the same goal in more subtle ways. But there is no evidence that "flashy" is Bush's modus operandi. I find his way disgusting, especially since he's happy to throw away so many young lives, all in the name of an adrenaline rush. Since your premise is speculative , your disgust is likely misplaced. Dave |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Hall" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:29:04 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message . .. On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:24:57 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: You need to look up the logical fallacy "Argumentum ad Ignorantiam" Here, I'll do it for you: http://www.philosophy.eku.edu/Willia...sec-web.htm#10 http://www.fallacyfiles.org/ignorant.html Dave So, after all this, are you saying you don't think a single person in Washington presented a workable, covert idea to your leader? It's certainly possible. You seem hell bent to deny that possibility. Dave No. What I'm saying is that a solution which did not involve big explosions and troop movements suitable for good photographs would not serve his own personal needs, even if a quieter, sneakier method was 100% successful as planned. Once again, you are presupposing a premise, which is borne solely from your personal opinion, and then assigning it as fact, and then using it to justify your own conclusion. You don't want me to give you yet another lesson on logical fallacies do you? Of course, I can't prove this..... Key statement. , but you've got to admit that some people do things flashy, and some reach the same goal in more subtle ways. But there is no evidence that "flashy" is Bush's modus operandi. There's a disease similar to Altzheimer's that can affect people as young as you and I - can't remember the name of it. You may have it, though. Remember the aircraft carrier nonsense? Mission accomplished? That was flashy, Dave. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:11:12 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:29:04 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message ... On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:24:57 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: You need to look up the logical fallacy "Argumentum ad Ignorantiam" Here, I'll do it for you: http://www.philosophy.eku.edu/Willia...sec-web.htm#10 http://www.fallacyfiles.org/ignorant.html Dave So, after all this, are you saying you don't think a single person in Washington presented a workable, covert idea to your leader? It's certainly possible. You seem hell bent to deny that possibility. Dave No. What I'm saying is that a solution which did not involve big explosions and troop movements suitable for good photographs would not serve his own personal needs, even if a quieter, sneakier method was 100% successful as planned. Once again, you are presupposing a premise, which is borne solely from your personal opinion, and then assigning it as fact, and then using it to justify your own conclusion. You don't want me to give you yet another lesson on logical fallacies do you? Of course, I can't prove this..... Key statement. , but you've got to admit that some people do things flashy, and some reach the same goal in more subtle ways. But there is no evidence that "flashy" is Bush's modus operandi. There's a disease similar to Altzheimer's that can affect people as young as you and I - can't remember the name of it. You may have it, though. Remember the aircraft carrier nonsense? Mission accomplished? That was flashy, Dave. It was a moral booster, and a celebration of a single ship's mission accomplished. Yes, it was orchestrated as a future P.R. campaign statement, most likely by someone other than Bush himself. Dave |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
And even MORE OT good news! | General | |||
Good News for Neal! | ASA | |||
OT--Very good news | General |