JackRiddler
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-03-06 03:52 PM
Original message |
| Ouch! You will laugh at this paradigmatic example of the debunkers' art |
|
Edited on Fri Mar-03-06 03:53 PM by JackRiddler
"Something worth reading," he said. I wish we could make the following thread a stickie. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
|
mirandapriestly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-03-06 04:36 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. Debunkers have very strict rules of logic & scientific proof |
|
for everyone except themselves.
|
greyl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-03-06 04:56 PM
Response to Original message |
| 2. You're a good little rabbit. |
|
I suppose you thought you'd need a whole new thread because the title Logical Fallacies in Scientific Writing isn't attractive to most CTers here and they wouldn't bother to read it?
|
JackRiddler
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-03-06 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
| 5. Obvious enough motive, isn't it? |
|
Edited on Fri Mar-03-06 07:32 PM by JackRiddler
Well, don't you think there's a reason it was sinking without responses until I discovered it? You need a PR manual next to that logic book, sonny boy. Got to learn to how to sex the headline.
Just 'til we draw attention, then we can retire this thread. Sweetheart.
|
canetoad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-03-06 05:46 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Written by Stephen Richardson. Check out his home page, follow link to his church.
Upon finding it dead, follow link to IFCA, check out their beliefs .
Read section 2: Movements Contrary to Faith for a clue about the author of this piece of work. Is this your idea of academic writing?
|
reprehensor
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-03-06 05:49 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I ain't buying what greyl is sellin'.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 25th 2013, 05:52 AM
Response to Original message |