Conflict between data and laws

jwoodward48 wrote:
If your interpretation of a law conflicts with observation, there are four possibilities:

1. The data is wrong.
2. The data is incomplete.
3. The law is wrong.
4. The law is being USED wrong.

Claiming that either the data is wrong or the law is wrong is the fallacy known as "false dilemma".

A False Dilemma is a fallacy in which a person uses the following pattern of "reasoning": Either claim X is true or claim Y is true (when X and Y could both be false). Claim Y is false. Therefore claim X is true.

A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, false binary, black-and-white thinking, bifurcation, denying a conjunct, the either–or fallacy, fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, fallacy of the excluded middle, the fallacy of false choice, or the fallacy of the false alternative) is a type of informal fallacy that involves a situation in which only limited alternatives are considered, when in fact there is at least one additional option.

False Dilemma

(also known as: false dichotomy*, the either-or fallacy, either-or reasoning, fallacy of false choice, fallacy of false alternatives, black-and-white thinking, the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, bifurcation, excluded middle, no middle ground, polarization)

Description: When only two choices are presented yet more exist, or a spectrum of possible choices exists between two extremes. False dilemmas are usually characterized by "either this or that" language, but can also be characterized by omissions of choices. Another variety is the false trilemma, which is when three choices are presented when more exist.

A false dilemma (also known as a false dichotomy) is a logical fallacy which involves presenting two opposing views, options or outcomes in such a way that they seem to be the only possibilities: that is, if one is true, the other must be false, or, more typically, if you do not accept one then the other must be accepted. The reality in most cases is that there are many in-between or other alternative options, not just two mutually exclusive ones.

False Dilemma

Definition:

A limited number of options (usually two) is given, while in reality there are more options. A false dilemma is an illegitimate use of the "or" operator.

Putting issues or opinions into "black or white" terms is a common instance of this fallacy.

Examples:

Either you're for me or against me.

jwoodward48 wrote:
Okay. I will be so clear this time that you cannot possibly misinterpret what I say.

...long-winded stuff anyone can look up...

jwoodward48 wrote:
You point to data. You invoke a law. You note that the data and your invocation of the law contradict. You then tell me that either the data is incorrect or I am arguing against Planck's Law, and of course Planck's Law is correct. You then draw the conclusion that the data has been systematically fudged.

jwoodward48 wrote:
This is a false dilemma. You are assuming that you are correctly using Planck's Law, so you just ignore the possibility that you are wrong, removing that from the three possibilities (incomplete ≈ wrong, so I will merge 1 and 2). Since nobody would argue against Planck's Law, the implication is that the data is wrong, but in reality you are misusing Planck's Law.

jwoodward48 wrote:
Since you just decided we're doing ad hominems here, I think that you have a very bad grasp of logic and science, but are so sure of yourself that you never consider that you could be wrong. How else could you confidently claim that molecules have temperature and radiate black body radiation?