Go back
A primer on logical fallacies

A primer on logical fallacies

Debates

Vote Up
1
Vote Down

@Metal-Brain said
WOW! You still believe Hunter's laptop is not real? You are making a fool of yourself on your own thread.

https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/testimony-reveals-fbi-employees-who-warned-social-media-companies-about-hack

How do you know Ramsland's report was a fallacy? You don't. You just chose to not believe it. Dominion never sued him. Dominion does no ...[text shortened]... machines were plagued with flaws. You would find that out if you ever had a desire to look into it.
Obviously the laptop was real. What were the contents of the laptop?

Vote Up
Vote Down
-1

@wildgrass said
Obviously the laptop was real. What were the contents of the laptop?
There was too much to read it all. He had a lot of nude pictures of his lovers. You can find them online. Nothing that surprising there though. He was a coke addict who did strippers enough to get one pregnant. The only thing surprising is how many pictures he had on there. Nearly 10,000

Hunter had a contact on his phone called Pedo Peter. Whose phone number was it? Speculative stuff like that. It was not just the FBI. The CIA colluded with the Biden Campaign to Discredit the Hunter Biden Laptop Story too. It was a conspiracy. Not a theory. A very real conspiracy to suppress what really happened. It worked too. You thought it wasn't true and it was.




https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/new-information-shows-cia-contractors-colluded-biden-campaign-discredit-hunter

Vote Up
2
Vote Down
-1

@Metal-Brain said
There was too much to read it all. He had a lot of nude pictures of his lovers. You can find them online. Nothing that surprising there though. He was a coke addict who did strippers enough to get one pregnant. The only thing surprising is how many pictures he had on there. Nearly 10,000

Hunter had a contact on his phone called Pedo Peter. Whose phone number was it? Sp ...[text shortened]... /media/press-releases/new-information-shows-cia-contractors-colluded-biden-campaign-discredit-hunter
Nah man. I watched those hearings. You can watch them too. They spent millions of taxpayer dollars investigating the laptop so of course they read it all. What did they conclude? There were nude photos of Hunter on there.

Hunter agreed to public, on-the-record deposition to answer questions but Republicans said no. He was instead privately deposed by Republicans and they came up with nothing. The entire story was a political stunt by Republicans.

Vote Up
Vote Down
-1

@wildgrass said
Nah man. I watched those hearings. You can watch them too. They spent millions of taxpayer dollars investigating the laptop so of course they read it all. What did they conclude? There were nude photos of Hunter on there.

Hunter agreed to public, on-the-record deposition to answer questions but Republicans said no. He was instead privately deposed by Republicans and they came up with nothing. The entire story was a political stunt by Republicans.
I didn't say they. I didn't have time to read it all. I was talking about me, not other people. Nude photos of consenting adults is not against the law. But who is Pedo Pete? Phone numbers cannot be tracked to a name?

Did the republicans ask him who Pedo Pete was?

Vote Up
Vote Down

@wildgrass

Some people think Pedo Pete is Joe Biden. Joe and Trump are both Pedophiles in my opinion.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ashley-biden-leaked-diary-accusation/

But you only accept republicans are pedophiles and rapists. When someone suggests a democrat is a pedophile you call it a logical fallacy as if you know.
You creating this thread is as silly as shav creating a thread about the truth in spectacular irony. He habitually rejects the truth he doesn't want to accept.

You do the same thing, but you are taking it an extra step and calling the inconvenient truth a logical fallacy. The irony is thick. Kind of like the irony of the film by Al Gore called an inconvenient truth. It contains lies. He asserted a backwards cause and effect. Partisan bias does not determine fallacies. It determines opinions and opinions are not facts.

Can you accept a republican wanted a gay prostitute in the white house?
Abe Lincoln was a republican. Can you accept he was gay?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/feb/11/usa.suzannegoldenberg

Vote Up
Vote Down

@Metal-Brain said
@wildgrass

Some people think Pedo Pete is Joe Biden. Joe and Trump are both Pedophiles in my opinion.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ashley-biden-leaked-diary-accusation/

But you only accept republicans are pedophiles and rapists. When someone suggests a democrat is a pedophile you call it a logical fallacy as if you know.
You creating this thread is as sill ...[text shortened]... . Can you accept he was gay?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/feb/11/usa.suzannegoldenberg
But you only accept republicans are pedophiles and rapists.

Obviously this is false, for multiple reasons. Try again.

Vote Up
Vote Down

@wildgrass said
But you only accept republicans are pedophiles and rapists.

Obviously this is false, for multiple reasons. Try again.
Do you accept it is probable Joe Biden is a pedophile?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ashley-biden-leaked-diary-accusation/

Vote Up
Vote Down

@wildgrass said
This is the anecdotal generalization fallacy. One persons experience does not necessarily validate a connection like that.

There are millions of vaccinated people and millions of unvaccinated people. Studies have shown that there is no difference in the rate of autism between these two groups. That seems like very strong evidence to me that vaccines don't cause autism.
If autism is random, it should happen at the same rate just before a vaccine visit as after. Former pediatrician Doug Hulstedt is one of the few pediatricians who actually tracked statistics in his practice, which specialized in autism. He had 46 cases of sudden-onset autism across 23 years. All 46 happened within two weeks after a vaccination. Not before. All after. And the claim that parents would never tell a pediatrician about autism occurring before a visit is sheer fabrication. That's not what any of the autism parents I asked did. Who are these parents who never tell the pediatrician — and where the pediatrician never notices on the next visit? Come on.

The unvaccinated vs. vaccinated Amish question. Same genes. Same environment. Same food. Same water. Same everything. The only difference: only vaccinated Amish kids get autism. Why? I've been asking for over a year now, and nobody in the Amish community is aware of an unvaccinated Amish child with autism — they only know vaccinated Amish kids with autism.

The under-vaccinated clinic question. Pediatric clinics that under-vaccinate have lower autism rates than their peers in the same area who follow the full CDC schedule. Every single one. I personally know the owner of one such clinic that severely under-vaccinates: zero autism in 25 years across over 6,000 kids born into the practice. We have the data from the practice obtained under a BAA. If vaccines don't cause autism, what do all these under-vaccinating clinics have in common — other than under-vaccination?

https://kirschsubstack.com/p/alex-berenson-says-vaccines-dont

3 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

@Metal-Brain said
If autism is random, it should happen at the same rate just before a vaccine visit as after. Former pediatrician Doug Hulstedt is one of the few pediatricians who actually tracked statistics in his practice, which specialized in autism. He had 46 cases of sudden-onset autism across 23 years. All 46 happened within two weeks after a vaccination. Not before. All after. And ...[text shortened]... mon — other than under-vaccination?

https://kirschsubstack.com/p/alex-berenson-says-vaccines-dont
Bigger picture it does not make sense. The Wakefield study was retracted for ethical reasons, and there hasn't been a clear study to date that can show a correlative link. This is not for lack of looking, many investigators have evaluated it. If there was a clear health risk with the current vax scheduling then there's no reason why clinicians would deliberately cover that up. The logical fallacy of small sample size applies to your examples.

Mechanistically, it doesn't make sense either. Autistic people have different brain structures. The celluarity changes and the synapses are dramatically different compared to non-autistic brains. These structures don't and can't change from "asymptomatic" to "symptomatic" from a single environmental exposure over a period of 2 weeks. These changes to brain structures induced by what's in a vaccine cannot be replicated in a lab, so why would you expect that it happens in humans? It is, however, not "random" as you say. Many studies are out there. Environmental factors very likely play a role in disease development, but these factors are more likely something from a persistent exposure (air pollution, diet, pesticides etc.) and maternal health (obesity, diabetes, age) that would lead to altered childhood brain development, not a single event. However, multi-factor environmental causality and complex genetic associations also makes it more difficult to identify one specific cause.

Vote Up
Vote Down

@wildgrass said
Bigger picture it does not make sense. The Wakefield study was retracted for ethical reasons, and there hasn't been a clear study to date that can show a correlative link. This is not for lack of looking, many investigators have evaluated it. If there was a clear health risk with the current vax scheduling then there's no reason why clinicians would deliberately cover that ...[text shortened]... sality and complex genetic associations also makes it more difficult to identify one specific cause.
I don't even know what a Wakefield study is. This is the first time it has come up. You keep saying this study and that study and you still have not posted your study. You are purposely digressing into more allegations without evidence. And you are rejecting common sense.

The unvaccinated vs. vaccinated Amish question. Same genes. Same environment. Same food. Same water. Same everything. The only difference: only vaccinated Amish kids get autism. Why? I've been asking for over a year now, and nobody in the Amish community is aware of an unvaccinated Amish child with autism — they only know vaccinated Amish kids with autism.

Is it because the Amish do not use pesticides? How do you explain this?

Vote Up
Vote Down

@wildgrass
Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, the government’s expert witness in the Hannah Polling case, admitted vaccines can trigger autism. The DOJ fired him immediately thereafter.

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/425061-how-a-pro-vaccine-doctor-reopened-debate-about-link-to-autism/

Top autism researcher Richard Frye has privately admitted that vaccines cause autism but “we aren’t allowed to talk about it.”

Vote Up
Vote Down

@wildgrass said
Bigger picture it does not make sense. The Wakefield study was retracted for ethical reasons, and there hasn't been a clear study to date that can show a correlative link. This is not for lack of looking, many investigators have evaluated it. If there was a clear health risk with the current vax scheduling then there's no reason why clinicians would deliberately cover that ...[text shortened]... sality and complex genetic associations also makes it more difficult to identify one specific cause.
" Autistic people have different brain structures. The celluarity changes and the synapses are dramatically different compared to non-autistic brains. These structures don't and can't change from "asymptomatic" to "symptomatic" from a single environmental exposure over a period of 2 weeks."

You make a lot of claims without evidence. And you are contradicting yourself. You said autism could result from environmental factors. That rules out pesticides. Your sources of information are giving you contradicting explanations.

What is your source of information. You are not proving your claims with evidence of any sort.

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

@Metal-Brain said
" Autistic people have different brain structures. The celluarity changes and the synapses are dramatically different compared to non-autistic brains. These structures don't and can't change from "asymptomatic" to "symptomatic" from a single environmental exposure over a period of 2 weeks."

You make a lot of claims without evidence. And you are contradicting yourself. ...[text shortened]... .

What is your source of information. You are not proving your claims with evidence of any sort.
Dude, I'm not having a conversation about what's known about the causes of autism and the anatomy of the human brain. You could take a course online or something.

Still, there's no credible evidence that can conclude vaccines cause autism. I've told you why I think the counterargument is nonsense.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down
-1

@Metal-Brain said
@wildgrass
Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, the government’s expert witness in the Hannah Polling case, admitted vaccines can trigger autism. The DOJ fired him immediately thereafter.

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/425061-how-a-pro-vaccine-doctor-reopened-debate-about-link-to-autism/

Top autism researcher Richard Frye has privately admitted that vaccines cause autism but “we aren’t allowed to talk about it.”
Blaming the trigger as the cause while ignoring the operative mechanism is a logical fallacy. Even if you could show that autism is "triggered" by vaccination (a dubious claim) it isn't logically possible that a vaccine can cause the disorder out of nothing

This seems similar to the highly dubious argument that link psychedelic drugs to schizophrenia. If you are reading the underlying supportive evidence for these claims, pay attention to how the conclusions are being framed, and what data are used to make those conclusions. Because a "trigger" could really be anything. What does the evidence say?

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

@wildgrass said
Dude, I'm not having a conversation about what's known about the causes of autism and the anatomy of the human brain. You could take a course online or something.

Still, there's no credible evidence that can conclude vaccines cause autism. I've told you why I think the counterargument is nonsense.
No. You have not explained why the unvaccinated Amish do not get autism.
You have made countless assertions without posting a single study to prove it.

You either have no real evidence or you are a liar. That is why you are evading an honest debate about it. Why don't you just admit the study you read recently was written by a person who has been convicted of fraud? Of course you don't want to talk about it anymore. All your sources are either criminals or funded by the vaccine makers. Isn't that right?