Best Fallacy Content - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Best Fallacy Content

  • Dinosaurs are a children's fairy tale

    Dinosaurs existed. But, wether evolution exists is still a question.
    Erfisflat
  • Are there only two genders/sexes?

    @TheShaun

    The only attacks I’ve levied are against things you’ve specifically done or admitted to doing. You pretend to know a great deal, ascribe that knowledge to nebulous, unverifiable research you claim to have done into sources you claim are unbiased, state that that knowledge requires a tremendous amount of interconnected data in order to fully understand, state that it’s not available online, and tell me to go out and find it to prove your point. Does that about summarize what you’ve done here? Imagine if I responded by saying that I’ve read every poll, conducted several myself, and done extensive research into psychological literature showing that I’m right, and then refused to present any of that information to you? Would you accept that I know what I’m talking about? Would you trust me? 

    I have researched it myself, and I have come to conclusions differing from yours based on that research. You can claim all you want that they’re biased (though you’re doing so fallaciously), and that I just need to do more research (though you admit that coming to your view requires committing to intensive and extensive work looking through materials that are not readily available), but all you’ve really done is state that any opinion that’s not yours is wrong and biased. I don’t know what you have been trying to do, but you come off as someone who cares not at all for engaging in a meaningful discussion. You seem more interested in calling out others on the basis that you know better than demonstrating that you do. If you don’t have time for this, then don’t bother. Just know that you’re right and keep it to yourself.
    TheShaun
  • Are there only two genders/sexes?

    @whiteflame
    1. This isn't the debate club at a highschool. I'm not bound by any rules other than the rules enforced by this website. Also, my purpose is not to convince you of anything. That would likely be a waste of time since so many people online refuse to accept defeat even when 100% proven wrong. My purpose is to inform the readers of information they may not have been aware of before. Even with sources being provided, I suggest everyone do some research themselves in order to be sure of accuracy. I'm only giving them suggestions on areas to look into.

    2. Wrong. Most information I've accumulated was through sources outside the internet and the entirety of information I possess on the topic is a vast amount. More information requires more time to find. I literally do not have the time to spare. Since I'm not as familiar with the internet as you are, it would be much faster for you to locate it yourself. Also, informing you of concepts you haven't considered before is the bare minimum. Hours of searching is extensive.

    3. Of course feminists are going to claim they have more support than they do. That's part of their method of operation. I expect you to avoid sources that are feminist ran or bias in favor of feminism. You're specifically looking for only information that agrees with you instead of searching for the actual truth. Just paying attention to the people you encounter will confirm the inaccuracy of the polls you used. Feel free to even ask them. You'll see that most people do not agree with the modern feminism narrative. Make sure you specify which part of feminism we are talking about. Of course most people agree with the old school feminism. It's the crazy, hateful, manipulative, lying, thin skinned, violent version of feminism(modern) that most do not agree with.
    Vaulkwhiteflame
  • Are there only two genders/sexes?

    @MayCaesar
    Both CYDdharta and Vaulk covered your major objection. So, I will deal with your minor objection. There are many words in the English language that have the same meaning as another while both are still used. For example: drink and beverage, contusion and bruise, hyper and energetic, tired and exhausted. It's actually so common that we have a word for them (synonyms) and books devoted to them (thesaurus).
    VaulkSonofason
  • Are there only two genders/sexes?

    @MayCaesar
    Both CYDdharta and Vaulk covered your major objection. So, I will deal with your minor objection. There are many words in the English language that have the same meaning as another while both are still used. For example: drink and beverage, contusion and bruise, hyper and energetic, tired and exhausted. It's actually so common that we have a word for them (synonyms) and books devoted to them (thesaurus).
    Vaulk
  • Are there only two genders/sexes?

    @whiteflame
    Everything I've stated is based on either statistics, psychology, or sociology. If you doubt any of my statements then you are free to search for information that confirms them. I spent decades accumulating the information and I do not have hours of free time to look up everything again for you. Also, in order to avoid any bias, manipulated, or false information, I always suggest people do their own research.
    Vaulkwhiteflame
  • Dinosaurs are a children's fairy tale

    Can't your reasoning be applied to any historical process, however? For example, like this: "Historians would have us believe that Ancient Rome existed and was the most prosperous civilization of its time - however, it was conquered by barbarians, and all traces of its existence were erased over the countless centuries. Only a pseudo-scientist would look at the remains of Roman architecture and the scriptures found and dream up the likes of Caesar or Colosseum".

    Is there any scientific evidence you would consider then? Because, strictly speaking, any evidence you are considering is already, at least, a few milliseconds old (due to our organism requiring some time to process the data it receives). Hence "nothing has ever existed" is the only conclusion your logic would lead to. And in that case, the very concept of "existence" is questionable.

    Humanity has found a very large variety of bones and other remains consistent with the current theories on dinosaurs and their history over the millennia. Birds' biology also is highly consistent with what we would expect from species originated from dinosaurs. While skepticism is always healthy in considering presented evidence, I would like to hear what theory you would propose to explain all these findings.
    Evidence
  • Are there only two genders/sexes?

    @whiteflame
    First, it isn't as widely held as you believe. Feminists are more heard of today because they are getting louder, not bigger. The percentage of people who identify as a feminist has actually been decreasing due to the crazy and/or violent methods they use to push an illogical narrative. The Huffington Post is not a reliable source due to it's well known left wing bias in favor of modern (third wave) feminism. Also, if a person holds the same beliefs as a feminist that were also created by feminism, then they essentially are a feminist themselves. Feminists and feminist supporters are still a minority and decreasing in population percentage. Most people agree with the goals of old school feminism(ie. equal rights), but not the narrative of modern feminism(ie. all men are potential rapists, pay gap, white privilege, institutionalized racism, etc).

    Second, because that's how the evolution of language works. Words that are not accepted by a significant amount are typically labelled slang or they become extinct. This is how we as a society gain and lose words. There are old words that "technically" have a certain definition, but no one uses the word in that form anymore. Even though dictionaries refuse to eliminate old definitions that no one uses anymore, people do not consider the no longer used definition as an actual definition anymore. Language is not based on what a dictionary says, it's based on how we use the words to convey our thoughts. When a person uses the word "gender" in casual conversation, the extremely vast majority think male and female. Even a lot of feminists recognize this. Their entire purpose of trying to change it is to push their narrative.

    Third, I only trust the parts that match the common usage by society. For example, even though an old definition of a "fag" is a cigarette, it now is only used as an insult towards gay men(in America at least). Even though the word technically held a different meaning, it's no longer used that way. It's old definition is essentially dead due to evolution of language. Yet, the dictionary still uses it. There are even words that began to become popular, but were quickly abandoned. The dictionaries did not even cover these words even though the majority considered them words. Dictionaries accepted the feminist definition of "gender" only because of the pressure applied by them. It will eventually lose and be abandoned due to the ever growing disapproval of the modern version of feminism. Therefore, dictionaries are not a 100% representation of (at least) the American version of English.

    On a side note, the entire purpose of the evolution of language is for it to become easier to convey a thought more specifically and with less explanation. Changing the definition of "gender" in the way feminists are attempting would be a de-evolution due to people being required to explain which definition they are going by. That is unless majority eventually accepts the new definition. That will not happen due to the ever growing disapproval of modern feminism and decreasing percentage of feminists that I mentioned earlier. It's much more logical to just use the word "personality" in place of feminists' version of "gender" since they are basically the exact same thing.
    EmeryPearson
  • Is Space Fake?

    "Two gold nuggets 2 inches apart in a rock is "space" between two gold nuggets, you can use the rock, the two gold nuggets, but there is nothing you can do with the word "space" in the rock other than use it in a sentence."

    You just described measuring said space, so this is a self-defeating argument. If you can measure it, then you can do more than use it as a word.

    ""time" is a word, just like space. Nothing impacts the word "time". It's not my take on the Hafele Keating experiment, it is they who claim that them traveling around the world made them younger because their clocks showed less time than the ones on the ground, .. not me."

    This is also incorrect, if time is just a word, you would be unable to measure it, and unable to use it mathematically. This is not the case. You would be unable to calculate average velocity for instance.  And to quote you, you stated "The Hafele - Keating experiment said it was the watch (atomic clocks on the plane) that dictated/proved time dilation.", clocks don't dictate time, they measure it. You definitely stated this, not the Hafele Keating experiment. 

    "So two objects distancing each other, like twin 'B' on the Spaceship leaving twin 'A' back on Globe-Earth cannot time dilate? I agree, because time dilation, like the other "relativistic effects" exist only in science fiction fairytales."

    If you have two objects distancing each other, you have two inertial references, not one. This is a lack of comprehension on your part.

    "Mathematically, neither the word space, or time has any value. "

    This is incorrect, time and space are used consistently in math. You would not be able to measure the speed of a car for instance.

    "Which theory espouses this? Logic does, which comes to me from reading the Bible and observing the world around me, which is real science."

    As you can see above, you are eschewing logic, rather than using it.

    @EmeryPearson
    here, I give you two inches of space, .. what will you do with it? Without the medium like the rock and two other objects like the gold nuggets, so without "things", .. space is just a word.

    You are not measuring time, you are measuring events, we just call it "time". If I gave you 10 days of "time", how would you be able to use it? The word "time" itself is not real, the 10 sun ups and sun downs is real, and they can differ in length. Juts like the word "and", .. useless in itself. But of course, CERN, NASA lives, and survives on semantics, .. twisting words. That's how sci-fi BB-Space survives, making up imaginary things out of 'nothing'.

    This is incorrect, time and space are used consistently in math. You would not be able to measure the speed of a car for instance.

    We use many other words in math, like I mentioned the word "and", .. so what?

    If you have two objects distancing each other, you have two inertial references, not one. This is a lack of comprehension on your part.

    I gave you an example of a Navy Carrier

    Image result for pic of navy carriers

    .. that's anchored, and one of those jets taking off from it. Both the Carrier and the jet is distancing from each other.


    Here is another scenario; a Harrier:
     
    Image result for pic of a jet Harrier


    .. hovering over the water in one spot, and the Aircraft Carrier is moving. The two are distancing from each other in both cases.

    My friend you have defended this fake NASA space and the CERN quantum realm of black holes, multiverses, imaginary time-travel by folding this 'Space fabric' (lol) for way too long, .. like those Star Wars geeks who go to science fairs to see Lord Wader ! They have lost all sense of reality, and can no longer tell the difference between science, and Comic Book science fiction? And guess who funds this mixture of science and science fiction?
    That's right, the ones that take ALL our money, the Masters of their Universe: CERN and NASA.

    This is incorrect, time and space are used consistently in math. You would not be able to measure the speed of a car for instance.

    So are the words "and', .. and  "speed" used consistently in math, .. neither of which has any value in mathematics other than semantics. The word 'speed' in itself is useless in math, it can be used to describe a car rolling on its wheels, distancing from other objects.

    As you can see above, you are eschewing logic, rather than using it.

    .. as anyone that has not been MK-ultra beyond help can see, “eschew obfuscation” is the middle name of both NASA and CERN, and those defending them. 

    EmeryPearson
  • Is the earth a ball?

    In order for the earth to be a ball, and the sun to be 93,000,000 miles away as modern astronomy claims, the rays must be parallel as they enter the Earth's atmosphere. This is a must.

    http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/eoc/special_topics/teach/sp_climate_change/p_sunlight_parallel.html

    This would necessarily cause any object between the earth and sun to cause a shadow that is relatively the same size, since the rays are parallel, the edges of the shadow would subsequently be parallel, this is demonstrable and can be proved with simple experimentation.

    Why then, do eclipses cause pinpoint-like shadows? In sherical earth theory, the moon is roughly the size of a coffee bean if the earth were the size of a nickel, or less than 1/3 the size of earth.

    https://moon.nasa.gov/about/in-depth/

    This means that, if the suns rays are parallel, and the heliocentric model is correct, the eclipse should cover at least 1/4 of one side of the earth. This isn't the case, giving us a proof that the earth is not as were being told.
    EmeryPearson

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2018 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch