Calling someone names and making
direct ad hominem attacks (and YES... the TROLL started ALL of that FIRST) is not an ideological argument.
Not exact matches
In its abusive form,
ad hominem is a
direct (and often inflammatory)
attack on the appearance, character, or personality of the individual.
However, if you are going to complain about
ad hominem attacks by others, it seems that you could also find plenty in this thread that are
directed at Dr. Meier and others supporting the consensus view.
So, let's see, when we (those defending the AGW theory) note that, of the small minority of scientists on the skeptic side making discredited arguments, many if not most seem to have quite
direct connections to right - wing or libertarian organizations like the Cato Institute or the George C. Marshall Fund or with the fossil fuel (especially coal) industry, we are derided as engaging in «
ad hominem»
attacks and so forth.
Personal
Attack (Ad Hominem which is Latin for «against the man» indicating that the attack is directed against the speaker rather than his or her argument): This fallacy occurs when we reject someone's claim or argument by attacking that person rather than the person's claim or arg
Attack (
Ad Hominem which is Latin for «against the man» indicating that the
attack is directed against the speaker rather than his or her argument): This fallacy occurs when we reject someone's claim or argument by attacking that person rather than the person's claim or arg
attack is
directed against the speaker rather than his or her argument): This fallacy occurs when we reject someone's claim or argument by
attacking that person rather than the person's claim or argument.