- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
06 Feb 14
Originally posted by KazetNagorraHmmm, ok so we have a hypothesis that RJHinds [hereto referred to as "The Subject"]
Hypothesis: RJHinds' secret fetish is downward pointing thumbs.
likes receiving, and seeks out thumbs down votes.
We therefore now need an experiment that will seek to falsify this hypothesis.
Do we have any proposals?
06 Feb 14
Originally posted by googlefudgeI guess the hypothesis could be falsified by finding a post by The Subject which is not absolutely retarded, revolting or otherwise reprehensible. The search is still on.
Hmmm, ok so we have a hypothesis that RJHinds [hereto referred to as "The Subject"]
likes receiving, and seeks out thumbs down votes.
We therefore now need an experiment that will seek to falsify this hypothesis.
Do we have any proposals?
Originally posted by KazetNagorraHypothesis: This is no more than a guess or opinion without any evidence. Once it is investigated and there is a little evidence then it may be called a theory.
Hypothesis: RJHinds' secret fetish is downward pointing thumbs.
Science is the proof something is true by repetitive testing and observation by independant researchers and always obtaining the ssme result.
We can have our opinions about what these investigators are claiming to discover, but nobody's opinion is science. But there are some people on here that seem to think their opinion belongs in the Science Forum and other's opinions should be banned from the Science Forum. The truth is nobody's opinion is science.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
06 Feb 14
Originally posted by KazetNagorraAhh, but would that falsify the hypothesis.
I guess the hypothesis could be falsified by finding a post by The Subject which is not absolutely retarded, revolting or otherwise reprehensible. The search is still on.
The hypothesis is that the subject likes thumbs down... not that the subject ONLY likes thumbs down.
06 Feb 14
Originally posted by googlefudgeYour hypothesis is a logical fallacy. I will not try to explain why, because you have shown not to accept correction because of your arrogant and elitist attitude.
Ahh, but would that falsify the hypothesis.
The hypothesis is that the subject likes thumbs down... not that the subject ONLY likes thumbs down.
06 Feb 14
Originally posted by RJHindsSo it is your hypothesis that he needs correction. Let's see your proof, take it beyond the guessing part.
Your hypothesis is a logical fallacy. I will not try to explain why, because you have shown not to accept correction because of your arrogant and elitist attitude.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
06 Feb 14
Originally posted by RJHindsNo I wont accept your 'correction' because it's wrong.
Your hypothesis is a logical fallacy. I will not try to explain why, because you have shown not to accept correction because of your arrogant and elitist attitude.
The original hypothesis was "Hypothesis: RJHinds' secret fetish is downward pointing thumbs."
There are no logical fallacies in that.
The reason being that there is no logical argument being made for there to be a fallacy in.
Originally posted by googlefudgeI take it then either he fails to understand the difference between a claim and an argument or that fails to understand that all logical fallacies are arguments, or, much more likely I think, he fails to understand both of these things -such is his ignorance and inability (by choice ) of understanding even the most extremely basic rudimentary knowledge. I guess he chooses to not understand this because he knows that if he doesn't choose this, he would not believe his creationist religion that he desperately wants to believe.
No I wont accept your 'correction' because it's wrong.
The original hypothesis was "Hypothesis: RJHinds' secret fetish is downward pointing thumbs."
There are no logical fallacies in that.
The reason being that there is no logical argument being made for there to be a fallacy in.
I think schools should teach all children very basic logic (such as this above and more ) from a young age and make very sure that they, at near as possible, all understand it and completely so that, as near as possible, they will understand basic logic as adults so that one day we stop getting dangerously ignorant adult people.
I believe this would be a perfectly practical policy as even people with low IQ like his must be able to learn very basic logic when young if really MADE to. The kind of very basic logic I am talking about really is easy to understand and doesn't require any significant cleverness and I would guess would take up less than 1% of the education time at school for most children so it would be well worth it. I remember effortlessly learning it as a child (from books and from my brother ) despite my schools never teaching logic!
07 Feb 14
Originally posted by humyMaybe that is why you are so illogical.
I take it then either he fails to understand the difference between a claim and an argument or that fails to understand that all logical fallacies are arguments, or, much more likely I think, he fails to understand both of these things -such is his ignorance and inability (by choice ) of understanding even the most extremely basic ru ...[text shortened]... earning it as a child (from books and from my brother ) despite my schools never teaching logic!