The Big Melt

Media_Truth · Dec 13, 2018

Jack Hays said:
One does not expect flies to have a high opinion of the swatter.

Off topic. There's another thread about mosquitos and insects. This belongs there. I didn't think the quality of your posts could go downhill from the High-Schooler Watts, but you've managed it, with No Tricks Zone.

Jack Hays · Dec 13, 2018

Media_Truth said:
Off topic. There's another thread about mosquitos and insects. This belongs there. I didn't think the quality of your posts could go downhill from the High-Schooler Watts, but you've managed it, with No Tricks Zone.

And yet, you do not challenge the substance.

Into the Night · Dec 13, 2018

Media_Truth said:
A new blog.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/scientific-papers-global-warming-myth/

FALSE!!!!

...Breitbart News ran an article titled “‘Global Warming’ Is a Myth, Say 58 Scientific Papers in 2017”. This article, which is in essence merely a link to a post from a blog that goes by the name “No Tricks Zone” and some added musings on “grant-troughing scientists,” “huxter politicians,” “scaremongering green activists,” and “brainwashed mainstream media environmental correspondents,” claims that this ragtag collection of studies proves that the long-standing scientific consensus on climate change is nothing but a myth.

Contextomy fallacy. Try to stay on topic.

Media_Truth · Dec 13, 2018

Jack Hays said:
And yet, you do not challenge the substance.

See #444. Guess who is at the bottom of their Blog - the Heartland Institute. Big Oil money - again. You love your Big Oil, don't you Jack?

Into the Night · Dec 13, 2018

Jack Hays said:
One does not expect flies to have a high opinion of the swatter.

Well put!

Into the Night · Dec 13, 2018

Media_Truth said:
Off topic. There's another thread about mosquitos and insects. This belongs there. I didn't think the quality of your posts could go downhill from the High-Schooler Watts, but you've managed it, with No Tricks Zone.

Fallacy fallacy. It was on topic.

Insult fallacy.

Into the Night · Dec 13, 2018

Media_Truth said:
See #444. Guess who is at the bottom of their Blog - the Heartland Institute. Big Oil money - again. You love your Big Oil, don't you Jack?

I like Big Oil. It makes gasoline cheap. It even saved the whales.

Quaestio · Dec 14, 2018

Into the Night said:
Contextomy fallacy. Try to stay on topic.

False. He provided the link to the entire content where the paragraph can be seen in context, therefore there was no "Contextomy fallacy".

It's also against DP rules to post the entire piece.

You post has zero substance.

Jack Hays · Dec 14, 2018

Media_Truth said:
See #444. Guess who is at the bottom of their Blog - the Heartland Institute. Big Oil money - again. You love your Big Oil, don't you Jack?

And yet, you still avoid the substance.

Into the Night · Dec 14, 2018

Quaestio said:
False. He provided the link to the entire content where the paragraph can be seen in context, therefore there was no "Contextomy fallacy".

It is a contextomy fallacy. The response had nothing to do with the post he was responding to.

Quaestio said:
It's also against DP rules to post the entire piece.

Irrelevant.

Quaestio said:
You post has zero substance.

Argument of the stone fallacy.

Quaestio · Dec 14, 2018

Into the Night said:
It is a contextomy fallacy. The response had nothing to do with the post he was responding to.

Irrelevant.

Argument of the stone fallacy.

Go back to your pet website with it's list of logical fallacies and just pick one at random then post it. That would be just as 'relevant' as the bulk of your posts.

Into the Night · Dec 15, 2018

Quaestio said:
Go back to your pet website with it's list of logical fallacies and just pick one at random then post it. That would be just as 'relevant' as the bulk of your posts.

Bulverism fallacy. False authority fallacy. Redefinition fallacy (logic->void).

Quaestio · Dec 15, 2018

Into the Night said:
Bulverism fallacy. False authority fallacy. Redefinition fallacy (logic->void).

Well done with your random picks of logical fallacies, although I only suggested you choose one, and you found three random ones! You're the irrelevancy King!

Congratulations! You WIN the internet!

Into the Night · Dec 15, 2018

Quaestio said:
Well done with your random picks of logical fallacies, although I only suggested you choose one, and you found three random ones! You're the irrelevancy King!

Congratulations! You WIN the internet!

Bulverism fallacy.

Quaestio · Dec 15, 2018

Into the Night said:
Bulverism fallacy.

You already won the Internet yesterday, why are you posting a random, irrelevant illogical fallacy again today?

Do you want to win the internet again today? It doesn't work like that. You'll need to try something different.

Into the Night · Dec 16, 2018

Quaestio said:
You already won the Internet yesterday, why are you posting a random, irrelevant illogical fallacy again today?

Do you want to win the internet again today? It doesn't work like that. You'll need to try something different.

Maybe you should try to actually present an argument instead of spending all your time emphasizing your bulverism.

Jack Hays · Dec 16, 2018

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
[h=1]Ten years ago, @AlGore predicted the North polar ice cap would be gone. Inconveniently, it’s still there[/h][FONT=&quot]On December 14, 2008, former presidential candidate Al Gore predicted the North Polar Ice Cap would be completely ice free in five years. As reported on WUWT, Gore made the prediction to a German TV audience at the COP15 Climate Conference: Al warned them that “the entire North ‘polarized’ cap will disappear in 5 years.” Watch…
Continue reading →
[/FONT]

Threegoofs · Dec 16, 2018

Love how people think Al Gore makes climate predictions.

Also love how they have to distort what he said to bolster their weak arguments.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Jack Hays · Dec 16, 2018

Threegoofs said:
Love how people think Al Gore makes climate predictions.

Also love how they have to distort what he said to bolster their weak arguments.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Lucky for everyone his words were recorded.
Amusing that those who delight in quoting obscure figures to try to embarrass skeptics should complain when a Nobel Prize winning AGW advocate is quoted.

Quaestio · Dec 16, 2018

Into the Night said:
Maybe you should try to actually present an argument instead of spending all your time emphasizing your bulverism.

No phallus head fallacies today?

Media_Truth · Dec 17, 2018

Threegoofs said:
Love how people think Al Gore makes climate predictions.

Also love how they have to distort what he said to bolster their weak arguments.

Stupid is as stupid does.

The deniers usually post a picture of Al Gore, when they have been totally defeated.

Into the Night · Dec 17, 2018

Jack Hays said:
Lucky for everyone his words were recorded.
Amusing that those who delight in quoting obscure figures to try to embarrass skeptics should complain when a Nobel Prize winning AGW advocate is quoted.

Ewww. Nicely skewered!

Into the Night · Dec 17, 2018

Media_Truth said:
The deniers usually post a picture of Al Gore, when they have been totally defeated.

You cannot 'defeat' the 1st or 2nd laws of thermodynamics, or the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Why not post a picture of Al Gore? He got trapped by his own predictions!

Media_Truth · Dec 18, 2018

Into the Night said:
You cannot 'defeat' the 1st or 2nd laws of thermodynamics, or the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Why not post a picture of Al Gore? He got trapped by his own predictions!

Phalactic fallacy!

The Big Melt

Media_Truth

Jack Hays

Traveler

Into the Night

Media_Truth

Into the Night

Into the Night

Into the Night

Quaestio

Jack Hays

Traveler

Into the Night

Quaestio

Into the Night

Quaestio

Into the Night

Quaestio

Into the Night

Jack Hays

Traveler

Threegoofs

Sophisticated man-about-town

Jack Hays

Traveler

Quaestio

Media_Truth

Into the Night

Into the Night

Media_Truth