Las Vegas

[kickingtone]

Well, before I head out for a bit, here's this:

If I have a glove on my hand, but turns out that it was a sock, then was it ever really a glove? Nope. It was always a sock.

If they are releasing information as fact, but turns out to be false, then it never really was fact.

And that is where your argument falls apart.

Now go pester someone else about nonsense and illogical thinking. Good day. The end.

Your ridiculous explanation means that you must know in advance how everything is "going to turn out" forever, before you can call anything a fact.

You feel "pestered" because you can't answer a simple question. Yes or No. I didn't ask you about a glove.

I am asking you, DO ALL FACTS REMAIN FACTS, or can they cease to be facts?

This straight question is giving you so much trouble because you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Mick Doobie]

Oh? Do tell.

Dude, why do you have some kind of chip on your shoulder? Sheesh.

How are you inconsistent in the things you say?

Well, first you say, " If you can write your opinion on there being a conspiracy (which i do believe is slightly offensive to those families involved), why can't I write my opinion on there likely not being one?"

Then you say, " It gets under my skin when folk attempt to solve grand crimes from their couches while educated minds and dedicated workers slave over evidence for months on end. I believe we should respect the process and let them do their job - wait to critique until the data is verifiable and presented in the most complete form possible. I believe we should respect the process and let them do their job - wait to critique until the data is verifiable and presented in the most complete form possible. "

One of those things is not the same. You can't write your opinion, because you don't believe you should, yet. Yeah? By your own standard, you didn't respect the process and wait to critique until after all verifiable data and evidence has been completed/presented. You passed judgement, your opinion, -likely no conspiracy-. By doing so, perhaps you too are being "slightly offensive to those families involved"? Would it surprise you to know there are more than a few people in the line of fire that night in Vegas who absolutely disagree with you, there was more than one shooter, officials in Las Vegas are not being completely honest?

Hell, you couldn't even be bothered to read my entire post before firing off a false interpretation. You cherry picked 2 words and ran with it. I also never said there was a conspiracy. You made that up, I guess based on something I said, or a false interpretation of what you thought I said. Probably a by-product of that chip, I reckon.

There are other inconsistencies, but i'll leave you to work it out.

 

[andrushkiwt]

I am asking you, DO ALL FACTS REMAIN FACTS, or can they cease to be facts?

If it was incorrect from the beginning, then it was never a fact. See: definition of fact.

 

[andrushkiwt]

Dude, why do you have some kind of chip on your shoulder? Sheesh

Why does everything offend you? Your topics should be argued against without you getting bent out of shape. Not everyone has to agree with you. And yes, I know others agree about conspiracies here - I provided a link above about that. Here it is again:

Trump Supporters Are Promoting Insane Conspiracy Theories About the Vegas Shooter – Mother Jones

What process didn't I "wait to critique"? You lost me there.

 

[kickingtone]

If it was incorrect from the beginning, then it was never a fact. See: definition of fact.

Look at you evading the question. I didn't ask you about something that wasn't a fact. I asked:

DO ALL FACTS REMAIN FACTS, or can they cease to be facts?

Anyway, I rest my case. Your inability to give a straight, direct answer has shown that your argument has completely collapsed.

 

[Mick Doobie]

I'm not offended in the least. I'm just not clear on your point, i'm not sure you are. You enjoy a senseless argument?

Do you have a reading comprehension problem, or short attention span? I didn't say anything about "others agree about conspiracies here". I said some who were there that night in Vegas believe there was more than one shooter, and also believe officials in Vegas are not being completely honest. You believe I should not say there was a conspiracy (which I never said) because it would be insensitive. Yet you demonstrate no concern for sensitivities when you state your opinion that there was likely no conspiracy. In fact, according to your standard of wait for the completion of the investigation, you should not even have an opinion yet, much less be so insensitive as to say it aloud.

If you weren't hell bent on an argument for the sake of an argument, one post in this thread from you would have sufficed. You don't believe at this time this should be discussed. Yet, here you are.

I provided a link..

Yeah, I saw that the first time. That's what it is all about, isn't it. It's a politics thing, you just can't help yourself. Can you? Go ahead, say it. You know you want to. Say it. Country music festival....probably a crowd full of uneducated gun toting redneck Trump supporters. No wonder quite a few believe the officials in Vegas are hiding the truth that there was more than one shooter. Hell, you're probably one of those of the enlightened left who secretly believe they kinda sorta deserved it, on account they support the laws that allowed the shooter to purchase and own all of those automatic assault rifles.

Pardon if I am trampling on anyone's sensitivities.

 

[andrushkiwt]

Look at you evading the question. I didn't ask you about something that wasn't a fact. I asked:

DO ALL FACTS REMAIN FACTS, or can they cease to be facts?

Anyway, I rest my case. Your inability to give a straight, direct answer has shown that your argument has completely collapsed.

If it ceased to be a fact, then it wouldn't have been a fact in the first place. Do you understand yet? Keep thinking. You can do it!

 

[andrushkiwt]

Hell, you're probably one of those of the enlightened left who secretly believe they kinda sorta deserved it

This is uncalled for, and a terrible, horrendous thing to say. Grow up man, what is wrong with you.

 

[kickingtone]

Look at you evading the question. I didn't ask you about something that wasn't a fact. I asked:

DO ALL FACTS REMAIN FACTS, or can they cease to be facts?

Anyway, I rest my case. Your inability to give a straight, direct answer has shown that your argument has completely collapsed.

If it ceased to be a fact, then it wouldn't have been a fact in the first place. Do you understand yet? Keep thinking. You can do it!

ALL FACTS REMAIN FACTS.
NOT ALL FACTS REMAIN FACTS.

Anyone know why he is avoiding picking one answer? He has totally lost the argument.

 

[andrushkiwt]

ALL FACTS REMAIN FACTS.
NOT ALL FACTS REMAIN FACTS.

Anyone know why he is avoiding picking one answer? He has totally lost the argument.

Listen dinglebat, I can have fun with you and the doobie over there all day, but he has crossed the line. It's not funny anymore.

And if you haven't put it together, brainiac, your question won't be answered because it isn't a valid question. You are assuming there is a fact to begin with, though there is not. Sorry. Take some logic courses and/or philosophy then we'll talk. Fallacy pal - begging the question. Look it up.

I'm telling you now, after that last comment, do not continue posting to me. This is done.

 

[Steenamaroo]

Most of you guys have been here long enough to know what happens when political threads find their way into the mod forum.

Maybe have a chat and a think and make certain that's the way we want to go with this?

 

[kickingtone]

You are assuming there is a fact to begin with, though there is not. Sorry. Take some logic courses and/or philosophy then we'll talk. Fallacy pal - begging the question. Look it up.

You are clueless. I used to help out quite a bit with logic on one philosophy forum, because I read mathematics at our top UK university, and I can tell you that you are clueless.

I have asked you if a statement is true or if its converse is true, and you can't answer!!! You are toast!

 

[kickingtone]

Most of you guys have been here long enough to know what happens when political threads find their way into the mod forum.

Maybe have a chat and a think and make certain that's the way we want to go with this?

Hope that isn't me. My contributions are non-political.

 

[andrushkiwt]

You are clueless. I used to help out quite a bit with logic on one philosophy forum, because I read mathematics at our top UK university, and I can tell you that you are clueless.

I have asked you if a statement is true or if its converse is true, and you can't answer!!! You are toast!

You taught math and interacted on a philosophy forum...and? Maybe you should pick up a book on philosophy pal. Begging the question. You are assuming there are facts to begin with, and that is a fallacy.

A dog is always or sheep?
Or
A dog is always a panda?

Yeah. Exactly. End it with this already. You are beyond logic at this point. Telling you again, do not quote me or post to me. That is it.

 

[kickingtone]

You taught math and interacted on a philosophy forum...and? Maybe you should pick up a book on philosophy pal. Begging the question. You are assuming there are facts to begin with, and that is a fallacy.

1. There is no assumption in the question. You don't understand logic.

2. It would not be a fallacy to assume facts exist.

A dog is always or sheep?
Or
A dog is always a panda?

All wrong.

The CONVERSE to

A dog is always or sheep. IS

It is not the case that a dog is always a sheep?

You are unable to select from the following two!!!

All facts remain facts.

OR

It is not the case that all facts remain facts.

It has nothing to do with begging the question, and your example was wack.

 

[gecko zzed]

This is why we can't have nice things.

This thread has travelled from interesting to stroppiness, and now looks more like something you would find on facebook. So this is where it ends.