Sentences with phrase «logical fallacies so»

Reader «Gimble» left a comment on an old post of mine that was full of typical anti-skeptical logical fallacies so I thought I would have some fun taking it apart.

Not exact matches

It is this false claim made by so many, particularly in more fundamental religious communities, that is being challenged by this simple illustration of the logical fallacy of such a view.

Therefore, I think we should laugh and enjoy the logical fallacies that make these cartoons so very interesting... and often the start of a great conversation and exchange of viewpoints.

When asked to provide support for your religious calims you have failed to do so and can only seem to appeal to emotions and logical fallacies.

In no way is that the only «logical» conclusion, and to assume so is actually a logical fallacy.

read up on quantum mechanics and tell me that sounds more realistic then the notion of a being of superior knowledge manipulating the elements of earth to create sentient man... its a logical fallacy... if we can do what we can do in a universe four billion years old, simple statistics demands than someone else would have done it beforehand, especially if we had «evlved» so drastically in a cosmic blink of an eye, as the prophet richard dawkins likes to put it.

So, yes... I «can» argue with it / you... and anyone else who is unfortunately, as quite often the case committing the logical fallacy of «circular reasoning» with a pinch of «begging the question.»

as kevin so well puts it (despite the fact that chiding a religious person for a logical fallacy is like being angry that the rain is wet):

You mean so she can continue to be confused by all the contradictions and logical fallacies of this supposedly «divinely inspired» book written by people with no concept of simple things like the chlorophyll in plants that make them green?

Try some critical thinking classes next time so you don't embarrass yourself with logical fallacies.

youre so desperate youre making logical fallacies..

I realize that it is an attempt to bolster one's own point, but this logical fallacy that states» because there are so many religions, it is impossible for the existence of one true religion», gets tiresome.

@Philipp So «the political perspective» doesn't include pointing out logical fallacies in arguments, especially if they involve statistics?

so as to conclude paleo is all bad is exactly the kind of logical fallacy I'm talking about.

So I asked her how she knew pet overpopulation was real in spite of the data and experience that proved otherwise, and she gave me the tautology that pet overpopulation is real because shelters are killing them, a logical fallacy, backward and circular reasoning, and a classic example of an after - the - fact justification.

T Marvell, OK, so now you are saying that it is a logical fallacy to cite the combination of a good correlation between ln [CO2] and temperature rise + the well known physics of greenhouse warming as evidence in favor of the consensus view?

So a doctor removes your pancreas, another independent variable, and that CA N'T cause diabetes whatever the evidence to the contrary????? That's plainly ridiculous - it's a straightforward logical fallacy to suggest that as something caused by W, X or Y, that Z, independently, can not, No science even needed.

eadler2,» Because of this it is a logical fallacy to claim that because we have seen increase in CO2 without warming so CO2 can't be warming the ocean.»

@SoF: There is so many logical fallacies in that section alone, that it will take me more time to point them out than it took you to write that section.

AGW is derived primarily from the use of six main «unfortunate metaphors» and propped up by every logical fallacy ever documented and many more yet to be so.

So following the guilt by association informal logical fallacy, if Dubya did it, then Obama did it, or some such.

(As propaganda depends on quantity and repetition... The truth just needs to be heard by a thinking mind...) So truthful questions and truthful evidence and truthful doubts and truthful counter points are attacked, vilified (usually «attack the messenger»), deleted, and drowned out in a flood of non-sequitur and appeal to authority arguments... (Another useful tool, btw, is just to measure the number of Logical Fallacies vs correct logical syllogisms... the more LF the more it's propaganda... the more correct logical syllogisms, data included btw, the less propaganda and the more honest science... but I haven't named that thought tool yet... Perhaps the LFLogical Fallacies vs correct logical syllogisms... the more LF the more it's propaganda... the more correct logical syllogisms, data included btw, the less propaganda and the more honest science... but I haven't named that thought tool yet... Perhaps the LFlogical syllogisms... the more LF the more it's propaganda... the more correct logical syllogisms, data included btw, the less propaganda and the more honest science... but I haven't named that thought tool yet... Perhaps the LFlogical syllogisms, data included btw, the less propaganda and the more honest science... but I haven't named that thought tool yet... Perhaps the LF Ratio?

So when those arrayed against the skeptical position employ gross logical fallacies and misstatements of fact, it's a sort of vindication.

A logical fallacy is not necessarily a Bayesian fallacy [3], so given a particular circumstance, jumping to the conclusion will be more likely than not, and get baked into human thinking as a heuristic [4].

For someone who emphasizes communication so heavily, your writing is slanted, confusing, full of logical fallacies, and generally unsupported.

Quick hint: I have a degree in Earth Sciences and some informal education in philosophy, so I will not just accept bluster and logical fallacies.

Our enemies have had considerable assistance from the fact that the average American is now incapable of seeing when their reasoning constitutes a logical fallacy (e.g. ad hominem, argument from consequences...) This includes the so - called mainstream media, who have for the most part forgotten how to be journalists.

So, the logical fallacy here would be that the OnePlus 3 would beat up, say, a Galaxy S7 edge with its pesky 4 GB of RAM and bullet - fast Exynos 8890 in a speedtest comparison, right?