elbe
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2008
- Messages
- 4,983
That was a weird post to use as evidence.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
The Roots of Teabaggers' Rage
- Thread starter Puppycow
- Start date
That was a weird post to use as evidence.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
Calling them on their BS is the root of Tea Party rage?
Yeah, that actually kinda fits.
History does repeat itself.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
Maybe the Tea Partiers should consider critically analyzing their own BS assumptions and claims rather than getting mad at those who point out the BS. Just sayin'.
elbe
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2008
- Messages
- 4,983
My biggest problem with the Tea Parties is that people are making them out to be something they aren't, but I blame the 24/7 news networks.
My aunt went to a TP rally somewhere. But then she's apparently a birther who doesn't like that Obama doesn't have an "American" sounding name.
My aunt went to a TP rally somewhere. But then she's apparently a birther who doesn't like that Obama doesn't have an "American" sounding name.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
Oh, wait! I know!
Is the root of the Tea Party rage the inability to articulate a coherent and/or consistent position and defend it?
...not that it couldn't be both that and anger at people calling on them to articulate a coherent and/or consistent position and defending it.
Chaos
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2003
- Messages
- 10,611
That is Upchurch´s reaction. And your evidence where?
Because, you know, if you don´t actually present evidence, Upchurch is not actually wrong or dishonest in rejecting something you did not provide.
You will have to ask a member of that particular political group.
There.
I leave that to others to decide.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
I think they have. See the large droves of people clamoring to defend that you had, in fact, provided evidence of your claims?
Me neither.
Appeal to popularity.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
Actually you did in your previous post. I was just pointing out that your appeal to popularity didn't even support your case.
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2001
- Messages
- 53,099
Nope.
Chaos
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2003
- Messages
- 10,611
Of course you were.
Another joke.
Nobody can force you to accept the evidence.
In which case, scientific findings are nothing but an appeal to popularity.
Chaos
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2003
- Messages
- 10,611
Where is your evidence? Which post in which thread contains it? Show me where your evidence - NOT your claim, but your evidence - is, then we will see if I accept it. A skeptic does not claim that someone else rejects evidence when the skeptic has not shown any evidence yet.
Scientific findings usually contain evidence other than "I leave that to others to decide". So, no, scientific findings are not an appeal to popularity, whereas your "I leave that to others to decide" is an appeal popularity.
You confuse the two.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
No, he's right. You are confusing scientific consensus over a long period of evidence and paper review with an appeal to popularity.
More to the point, you are confusing making a claim with providing evidence. Simply asserting something is true, as you have, is not the same thing as having provided evidence that the assertion is true.