Message from @Mee6
Discord ID: 637908795464613888
Meaning it focuses on the content
Not the structure of the argument
That would be a formal fallacy
And a formal fallacy is a logical fallacy.
it may not be a logical fallacy, but it still doesn't prove anything
that was my point
It does when it's based on empirical data that's been gathered over many years by experts in the field.
Attacking the consensus without disproving what the consensus is around, naturally, is absolutely moronic.
It supports the argument that the contrary is more improbable, as experts in the field who study it are in support. @qwasi
yes
i get that
Also deductive vs inductive reasoning. One is better than the other but not possible in many cases
I'm skeptical of the 97% consensus, that's all I'm saying
Because 49 ex-workers for NASA wrote a letter.
No
<:peepok:583236153852035072>
What's it like being so arrogant that you're convinced you can read someone's mind over the internet?
I didn't read your mind. I wrote what you typed.
And that's what you typed.
and you're a retard
?
You've nothing to say back and you go to your primitive nature through animalistic insults.
I see.
lol
here in a sec you'll be calling me every disgusting name you can think of
hypocrite
?
act dumb, it's easy for you isn't it
🍿
Just a few premeditated names, which describe you perfectly. Far from "every disgusting name you can think of", lad.
Stay wrong.
brb, going to spray some aerosol cans into the air for no reason
Go on, you do that when you've got nothing to say in a formal debate.
formal debate? LOL
Go on now, lad.
I'll see you later.
When I come back do you want to talk about guitars?
Sure, if you somehow start knowing what you're talking about within those 10 minutes.
I know about guitars
Yeah, I saw how much you know about guitars yesterday as well.