Remember me
▼ Content

fabrication


fabrication02-12-2019 19:56
keepit
★★★☆☆
(783)
Too much made up stuff. Then the person that made up the imaginary point argues against their own imaginary point and then pretends to win the argument.
It's kind of like creating a crisis and then solving the crisis they caused in the first place. Bogus!
02-12-2019 20:45
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5225)
keepit wrote:
Too much made up stuff. Then the person that made up the imaginary point argues against their own imaginary point and then pretends to win the argument.
It's kind of like creating a crisis and then solving the crisis they caused in the first place. Bogus!

Welcome to my world. tmiddles assigns to me a bogus position that I don't have, typically about one per day on average. He then argues against that bogus position and declares me to be wrong and himself a genius. He then points to all the times that I have been "wrong" and him a genius as reasons I am just always wrong.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-12-2019 05:22
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1529)
keepit wrote:
It's kind of like creating a crisis and then solving the crisis they caused in the first place. Bogus!


Sounds EXACTLY like a certain political party that I particularly detest.


spot-
Into the Night is also has delusions of comptance
03-12-2019 10:48
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1585)
keepit wrote:
Too much made up stuff. Then the person that made up the imaginary point argues against their own imaginary point and then pretends to win the argument.
It's kind of like creating a crisis and then solving the crisis they caused in the first place. Bogus!


It's called "straw manning"

"A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man"."



My favorite example is in "Thank you for smoking"

Joey: So, what happens when you're wrong?

Nick: Well, Joey, I'm never wrong.

Joey: But you can't always be right.

Nick: Well, if it's your job to be right, then you're never wrong.

Joey: But what if you are wrong?

Nick: Okay, let's say that you're defending chocolate and I'm defending vanilla. Now, if I were to say to you, "Vanilla's the best flavor ice cream", you'd say...?

Joey: "No, chocolate is."

Nick: Exactly. But you can't win that argument. So, I'll ask you: So you think chocolate is the end-all and be-all of ice cream, do you?

Joey: It's the best ice cream; I wouldn't order any other.

Nick: Oh. So it's all chocolate for you, is it?

Joey: Yes, chocolate is all I need.

Nick: Well, I need more than chocolate. And for that matter, I need more than vanilla. I believe that we need freedom and choice when it comes to our ice cream, and that, Joey Naylor, that is the definition of liberty.

Joey: But that's not what we're talking about.

Nick: Ah, but that's what I'm talking about.

Joey: But ... you didn't prove that vanilla's the best.

Nick: I didn't have to. I proved that you're wrong, and if you're wrong, I'm right.


ITN/IBD and the "Deniers" for lack of a better term are not interested in making any scientific progress, discovery or anything productive of any kind. They are simply interested in proving "the enemy" wrong. When that is your goal it's almost impossible not to stoop to this fallacy.
Edited on 03-12-2019 11:31
03-12-2019 18:18
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10253)
tmiddles wrote:
keepit wrote:
Too much made up stuff. Then the person that made up the imaginary point argues against their own imaginary point and then pretends to win the argument.
It's kind of like creating a crisis and then solving the crisis they caused in the first place. Bogus!


It's called "straw manning"

"A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man"."



My favorite example is in "Thank you for smoking"

Joey: So, what happens when you're wrong?

Nick: Well, Joey, I'm never wrong.

Joey: But you can't always be right.

Nick: Well, if it's your job to be right, then you're never wrong.

Joey: But what if you are wrong?

Nick: Okay, let's say that you're defending chocolate and I'm defending vanilla. Now, if I were to say to you, "Vanilla's the best flavor ice cream", you'd say...?

Joey: "No, chocolate is."

Nick: Exactly. But you can't win that argument. So, I'll ask you: So you think chocolate is the end-all and be-all of ice cream, do you?

Joey: It's the best ice cream; I wouldn't order any other.

Nick: Oh. So it's all chocolate for you, is it?

Joey: Yes, chocolate is all I need.

Nick: Well, I need more than chocolate. And for that matter, I need more than vanilla. I believe that we need freedom and choice when it comes to our ice cream, and that, Joey Naylor, that is the definition of liberty.

Joey: But that's not what we're talking about.

Nick: Ah, but that's what I'm talking about.

Joey: But ... you didn't prove that vanilla's the best.

Nick: I didn't have to. I proved that you're wrong, and if you're wrong, I'm right.


ITN/IBD and the "Deniers" for lack of a better term are not interested in making any scientific progress, discovery or anything productive of any kind. They are simply interested in proving "the enemy" wrong. When that is your goal it's almost impossible not to stoop to this fallacy.

The only one stooping to this fallacy is YOU, and other liberals.


The Parrot Killer




Join the debate fabrication:

Remember me

▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact