| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Mark Richardson" |
| Date: |
23 Jun 2003 06:47:10 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Agnosticism is more LOGICAL |
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 20:56:33 GMT, wrote:
In talk.atheism Mark Richardson <mark.richardson@die.spammers.die> wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 18:25:11 GMT, "KBC" <kbc@westlink.cop> wrote:
"Stanley Leverlock" <stan@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:z5GIa.44911$Fa6.31652@sccrnsc02...
Goodye Stanley, hello KBC!
The "Skeptic" mini-FAQ is coming soon!
...........
The names/identities of Skeptic
Ya missed at leat one. There's also just KB (showed up right before KBC.)
Thanks!
I like to be as accurate as possible - it's easy to miss the odd one -
especially when he is changing ID's rapidly.
Mark.
--
Mark Richardson mDOTrichardsonATutasDOTeduDOTau
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle aged Atheists with a Sense of Humour)
-----------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
| User: "Romeo" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is more LOGICAL |
24 Jun 2003 10:43:35 AM |
|
|
"Mark Richardson" <mark.richardson@die.spammers.die> wrote in message
news:pb4ffvor0q1ivaolm8liie0uob0jtiunjm@4ax.com...
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 20:56:33 GMT, wrote:
In talk.atheism Mark Richardson <mark.richardson@die.spammers.die> wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 18:25:11 GMT, "KBC" <kbc@westlink.cop> wrote:
"Stanley Leverlock" <stan@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:z5GIa.44911$Fa6.31652@sccrnsc02...
Goodye Stanley, hello KBC!
The "Skeptic" mini-FAQ is coming soon!
...........
The names/identities of Skeptic
Ya missed at leat one. There's also just KB (showed up right before KBC.)
Thanks!
I like to be as accurate as possible - it's easy to miss the odd one -
especially when he is changing ID's rapidly.
Mark.
--
Mark Richardson mDOTrichardsonATutasDOTeduDOTau
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle aged Atheists with a Sense of Humour)
-----------------------------------------------------
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell
as sweet". - (Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene II).
"The Fallacies of Diversion : The fallacies in this family share the
characteristic that they distract attention away from the issue that is
genuinely under discussion." --
http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/ignoratio.asp
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is more LOGICAL |
24 Jun 2003 01:49:01 PM |
|
|
In talk.atheism Romeo <romeo@shakespear.net> wrote:
"Mark Richardson" <mark.richardson@die.spammers.die> wrote in message
news:pb4ffvor0q1ivaolm8liie0uob0jtiunjm@4ax.com...
Thanks!
I like to be as accurate as possible - it's easy to miss the odd one -
especially when he is changing ID's rapidly.
Mark.
--
Mark Richardson mDOTrichardsonATutasDOTeduDOTau
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle aged Atheists with a Sense of Humour)
-----------------------------------------------------
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell
as sweet". - (Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene II).
Or, in this case, stink as badly.
"The Fallacies of Diversion : The fallacies in this family share the
characteristic that they distract attention away from the issue that is
genuinely under discussion." --
http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/ignoratio.asp
Hell, Sceptic is interested in any genuine discussion anyways so it doesn't
matter with him.
--
Mike atheism: a non-prophet organization...
Creation Science: an oxymoron actually created by morons...
-------------------------------
http://truthordare.dyndns.org/t-or-d
-------------------------------
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you
do criticize them, you're a mile away, and you have their shoes.
-------------------------------
"If money is the root of all evil, then why does the church always want it??"
WWJD=What Would Jesus Drive? ("He drove them out in his Fury")
.
|
|
|
| User: "Romeo" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is more LOGICAL |
24 Jun 2003 05:35:00 PM |
|
|
<prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote in message
news:x21Ka.3242$lT4.37@fe04.atl2.webusenet.com...
In talk.atheism Romeo <romeo@shakespear.net> wrote:
"Mark Richardson" <mark.richardson@die.spammers.die> wrote in message
news:pb4ffvor0q1ivaolm8liie0uob0jtiunjm@4ax.com...
Thanks!
I like to be as accurate as possible - it's easy to miss the odd one -
especially when he is changing ID's rapidly.
Mark.
--
Mark Richardson mDOTrichardsonATutasDOTeduDOTau
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle aged Atheists with a Sense of Humour)
-----------------------------------------------------
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would
smell
as sweet". - (Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene II).
Or, in this case, stink as badly.
"Stink" is just more pejorative argument _ad hominem_, just another form of
fallacy of diversion.
"The Fallacies of Diversion : The fallacies in this family share the
characteristic that they distract attention away from the issue that is
genuinely under discussion." --
http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/ignoratio.asp
Hell, Sceptic is interested in any genuine discussion anyways so it
doesn't
matter with him.
Because he takes exception to what you say?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is more LOGICAL |
24 Jun 2003 09:45:38 PM |
|
|
In article <om4Ka.10979$XG4.9483@rwcrnsc53>,
"Romeo" <romeo@shakespear.net> wrote:
<prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote in message
news:x21Ka.3242$lT4.37@fe04.atl2.webusenet.com...
In talk.atheism Romeo <romeo@shakespear.net> wrote:
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would
smell
as sweet". - (Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene II).
Or, in this case, stink as badly.
"Stink" is just more pejorative argument _ad hominem_, just another form of
fallacy of diversion.
It is the arguments whose stinks are here detectable, and
relevant. Their author has to deal with his own stinks
privily.
.
|
|
|
| User: "KGB" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is more LOGICAL |
25 Jun 2003 12:32:07 AM |
|
|
"Virgil" <vmhjr2@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:vmhjr2-268B6F.20453824062003@netnews.attbi.com...
In article <om4Ka.10979$XG4.9483@rwcrnsc53>,
"Romeo" <romeo@shakespear.net> wrote:
<prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote in message
news:x21Ka.3242$lT4.37@fe04.atl2.webusenet.com...
In talk.atheism Romeo <romeo@shakespear.net> wrote:
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would
smell
as sweet". - (Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene II).
Or, in this case, stink as badly.
"Stink" is just more pejorative argument _ad hominem_, just another form
of
fallacy of diversion.
It is the arguments whose stinks are here detectable, and
relevant.
Naw! That's your upper lip you smell, from spewing all that ***** out
your mouth, old boy.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is more LOGICAL |
25 Jun 2003 10:35:25 AM |
|
|
"Virgil" <vmhjr2@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:vmhjr2-73548A.00494725062003@netnews.attbi.com...
In article <rtaKa.13837$Ab2.35277@sccrnsc01>,
"KGB" <kgb@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Virgil" <vmhjr2@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:vmhjr2-268B6F.20453824062003@netnews.attbi.com...
In article <om4Ka.10979$XG4.9483@rwcrnsc53>,
"Romeo" <romeo@shakespear.net> wrote:
<prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote in message
news:x21Ka.3242$lT4.37@fe04.atl2.webusenet.com...
In talk.atheism Romeo <romeo@shakespear.net> wrote:
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name
would
smell
as sweet". - (Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene II).
Or, in this case, stink as badly.
"Stink" is just more pejorative argument _ad hominem_, just another
form
of
fallacy of diversion.
It is the arguments whose stinks are here detectable, and
relevant.
Naw! That's your upper lip you smell, from spewing all that ***** out
your mouth, old boy.
And this from one who pretends to dislike argumentum ad
hominem?
You can dish it out by the ton, but you can't take an ounce of it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is more LOGICAL |
25 Jun 2003 01:39:56 PM |
|
|
In article
<1jjKa.17326$e26.12940@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>,
"Ray" <ray@hotmail.com> wrote:
It is the arguments whose stinks are here detectable, and
relevant.
Naw! That's your upper lip you smell, from spewing all that ***** out
your mouth, old boy.
And this from one who pretends to dislike argumentum ad
hominem?
You can dish it out by the ton, but you can't take an ounce of it?
Considering the tons of ad hominem accusations Capon has
dished out, and to how many people, he is hardly in a
position to complain about being the recipient of such a
well deserved accusation of that same sin.
But reasonableness has never been a facet of any of Capons
many personalities.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is more LOGICAL |
25 Jun 2003 03:04:22 PM |
|
|
"Virgil" <vmhjr2@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:vmhjr2-535404.12395325062003@netnews.attbi.com...
In article
<1jjKa.17326$e26.12940@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>,
"Ray" <ray@hotmail.com> wrote:
It is the arguments whose stinks are here detectable, and
relevant.
Naw! That's your upper lip you smell, from spewing all that *****
out
your mouth, old boy.
And this from one who pretends to dislike argumentum ad
hominem?
You can dish it out by the ton, but you can't take an ounce of it?
Considering the tons of ad hominem accusations Capon has
dished out, and to how many people, he is hardly in a
position to complain about being the recipient of such a
well deserved accusation of that same sin.
But reasonableness has never been a facet of any of Capons
many personalities.
Are you having fun with this little fallacy of diversion of yours?
"The Fallacies of Diversion : The fallacies in this family share the
characteristic that they distract attention away from the issue that is
genuinely under discussion." --
http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/ignoratio.asp
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
