• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Proof and Facts[W:76"283]

Is it appropriate to demand proof or facts on Debate Politics?

  • Total voters
    57
  • Poll closed .
Re: Proof and Facts

vasuderatorrent said:
Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes.



Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes.



Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes.



Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes.



Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes.



Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes.
Click to expand...

I voted 'yes' other. For the reason I said, that's it's reasonable to expect someone to either argue their opinion with rational logic or in lack thereof, provide some information with sources.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

Yes. When a post refers to a source, e.g. "FBI school shooting statistics show that...", then a quote from and/or link to that source material should be provided. One cannot discuss that which is not readily available to them (or that which does not exist).

The idea that one can assert "a fact" and then come back with a snarky retort to a request for the supporting link like "I won't do your homework for you" is ridiculous. This happened recently in school shooting thread and the FBI apparently keeps no "school shooting" statistics.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

Unitedwestand13 said:
Is it better to ask " what was the thought process that led you to make that conclusion?"
Click to expand...

Agreed, but it's snarkier to say 'prove it', because they've failed to counter with a reasonable point.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

Mycroft said:
There is also the issue of what some people present as proof.

I've seen people state opinions and then try to back it up with an article that does nothing more than restate that opinion. But they will swear they gave proof. LOL!!
Click to expand...

What are you saying? That you ignore and discredit their proof no matter what?
 
Re: Proof and Facts

I am here to offer my many many opinions. Yeah, and there is google to best verify from your own trusted sources.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

vasuderatorrent said:
Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes

Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes.

Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes.

Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes.

Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes.

Have you voted in this poll? I only see two 'no' votes.
Click to expand...

Yep. Voted yes other.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

vasuderatorrent said:
What are you saying? That you ignore and discredit their proof no matter what?
Click to expand...

Sometimes I ignore or discredit provided proof...but not "no matter what". If their "proof" doesn't actually provide any facts...or if it is obvious that their proof is nothing more than spun facts...then I am inclined to ignore or discredit.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

Many sites required a link or don't bother. Otherwise it's just a vanity. IMHO
 
Re: Proof and Facts

vasuderatorrent said:
Is it appropriate to demand proof and facts on Debate Politics?

From my observation 100% of posters on Debate Politics are anonymous. This is also the internet where words can be typed in any order to say anything imaginable. Concrete evidence can rarely be presented via the internet. I also think this is a place to express your opinion on interesting and non-interesting topics. Can't a person base their opinion upon a lie? Just because their opinion is based upon a lie this doesn't make their opinion any less valid. After all, it's an opinion. An opinion doesn't really hold much weight anyways. Sure occasionally an opinion can change someone's mind but that doesn't make it authoritative.

What do you guys think? Are proof and facts necessary when presenting your opinion?
Click to expand...

If an opinion is formed based on lies, then that opinion is less valid than the opinion of someone who has taken the time to learn the facts about a subject and formed their opinion based on that.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

It is quality I think about. If a story breaks in some small town and hits the blogosphere as an outrage piece, I try to go to a local source first, then variants of national news. I have a hierarcy of trusted sources up from there, and often it depends on what the subject is.
Mycroft said:
Sometimes I ignore or discredit provided proof...but not "no matter what". If their "proof" doesn't actually provide any facts...or if it is obvious that their proof is nothing more than spun facts...then I am inclined to ignore or discredit.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Proof and Facts

Mycroft said:
Sometimes I ignore or discredit provided proof...but not "no matter what". If their "proof" doesn't actually provide any facts...or if it is obvious that their proof is nothing more than spun facts...then I am inclined to ignore or discredit.
Click to expand...

Do you ever provide counter proof?
 
Re: Proof and Facts

celticwar17 said:
It depends, logic arguments don't need proof. You show the logic is not sound or try to claim one of the premises is false by providing proof of your own against all the premises.

Sometimes people try to pressure proof for a logic argument, just to derail/hack a thread.

And a problem with the internet is you can provide "proof" that pigs fly....
Click to expand...

Really?!?!?!? Then why can't people provide verifiable evidence for a claim that "pre-existing natural rights" actually existed before the Constitution or state constitutions anywhere outside of a self imposed belief?
 
Re: Proof and Facts

American said:
Oh no, some people expect peer reviewed papers.
Click to expand...

While others simply want some verifiable evidence when you make a claim of alleged fact. But some here have an aversion to verifiable evidence like a rotting leper has to high winds.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

haymarket said:
While others simply want some verifiable evidence when you make a claim of alleged fact. But some here have an aversion to verifiable evidence like a rotting leper has to high winds.
Click to expand...

That would be you blowing in the wind.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

SMTA said:
That would be you blowing in the wind.
Click to expand...

Can you provide one example where I failed to provide evidence on a claim of fact? Or was this just a cheap shot opportunity to get in a fifth grade level insult?
 
Re: Proof and Facts

haymarket said:
While others simply want some verifiable evidence when you make a claim of alleged fact. But some here have an aversion to verifiable evidence like a rotting leper has to high winds.
Click to expand...

Some here never believe anything placed in front of them. But let's welcome you to the poll section, you wandered out of your usual gun zone to be with us here today. That's a big step.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

American said:
Some here never believe anything placed in front of them. But let's welcome you to the poll section, you wandered out of your usual gun zone to be with us here today. That's a big step.
Click to expand...

Usual gun zone!?!?!?!? What does that mean? Unlike some of your fellow gun fanatics who are dogged single issue posters - I post in many different areas of this board. But feel free to post evidence otherwise.

Oh wait - there it is again... that pesky demand for evidence. :roll:
 
Re: Proof and Facts

haymarket said:
Can you provide one example where I failed to provide evidence on a claim of fact? Or was this just a cheap shot opportunity to get in a fifth grade level insult?
Click to expand...

Judicial notice.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

SMTA said:
Judicial notice.
Click to expand...

Which is your way of saying you really do NOT have a clue nor can you back up your mouth with any verifiable evidence. Your so called "judicial notice" is crap. Its just BS for avoiding any actual evidence in favor of saying yoru fellow true believers share you own biases and they too will not present verifiable evidence.

You remind me of that scene in PRINCESS BRIDE where Mandy Patankin tells his boss that he keeps misusing a term that does not mean what he thinks it means.
 
Last edited:
Re: Proof and Facts

haymarket said:
Usual gun zone!?!?!?!? What does that mean? Unlike some of your fellow gun fanatics who are dogged single issue posters - I post in many different areas of this board. But feel free to post evidence otherwise.

Oh wait - there it is again... that pesky demand for evidence. :roll:
Click to expand...

I never see you elsewhere, guess you like the gun zone.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

American said:
I never see you elsewhere, guess you like the gun zone.
Click to expand...

Like I said - feel free to post the evidence of your claim. Its rather appropriate in a thread like this to see you unable to do it.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

haymarket said:
Really?!?!?!? Then why can't people provide verifiable evidence for a claim that "pre-existing natural rights" actually existed before the Constitution or state constitutions anywhere outside of a self imposed belief?
Click to expand...
see that's a logical argument... no proof needed, you may or may-not agree with the logic, but it comes from under the assumption of a creator.

If you don't agree with the assumption, then you arn't really in the discussion in the first place.... you are then just debating on whether there is a creator or not.... which is separate discussion all together.

Whether there is a creator or not can also be argued purely from logical derivation and not proof as well.... you may disagree with the logical derivation.... but essentially this can all be a discussion without proof, just reason.... philosopher's do it all the time.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

celticwar17 said:
see that's a logical argument... no proof needed, you may or may-not agree with the logic, but it comes from under the assumption of a creator.

If you don't agree with the assumption, then you arn't really in the discussion in the first place.... you are then just debating on whether there is a creator or not.... which is separate discussion all together.

Whether there is a creator or not can also be argued purely from logical derivation and not proof as well.... you may disagree with the logical derivation.... but essentially this can all be a discussion without proof, just reason.... philosopher's do it all the time.
Click to expand...

He doesn't believe in natural rights, because under the theory of the founders they cannot be infringed upon, and all case not without due process specific to an individual.
 
Re: Proof and Facts

haymarket said:
Which is your way of saying you really do NOT have a clue nor can you back up your mouth with any verifiable evidence. Your so called "judicial notice" is crap. Its just BS for avoiding any actual evidence in favor of saying yoru fellow true believers share you own biases and they too will not present verifiable evidence.

You remind me of that scene in PRINCESS BRIDE where Mandy Patankin tells his boss that he keeps misusing a term that does not mean what he thinks it means.
Click to expand...

So you do not understand the phrase?
 
Re: Proof and Facts

haymarket said:
Like I said - feel free to post the evidence of your claim. Its rather appropriate in a thread like this to see you unable to do it.
Click to expand...

Snort!

Denial on your part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom