This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← Two equally bad fallacies

Arnott Bird's Avatar Jump to comment 7 by Arnott Bird

Comment 4 by Alan4discussion :

I think one of the most irritating fallacious arguments is, when various people have rationally explained in detail,why a particular claim is irrational, vacuous, false, unevidenced rubbish, some poster ironically condemns them citing constructive criticism as ad-hominems in a mirror image of their own posts, while posturing as arbiters of "clear thinking"!!

This is supposed to be a site about clear-thinking and promoting reason, yet the responses to the letter and to the editor's response have simply been superficial, posturing, presumptious and personal ad-hominems; perfectly comfortable and easily digested within the arena in which they are expressed.

Yes, foolish of me to think that

Assclown of the month award, more like.

or

I gives me great pleasure to award you the MUPPET OF THE MONTH AWARD for posturing servility to pseudo science!

were anyhting other than reasoned responses, rather than personal attacks.

Or that your conclusion that he was lying about being within the scientific community was anything but presumptious. Just as presumptious as the conclusion that I almost certainly can't be an atheist, as I had the audacity to question those presumptions, and also to question whether what you think the letter writer was saying was what you think it said.

I have to say Alan4Discussion (a more innapropriate name I could not imagine) that this constant linking to my posts seem a little...personal. Seems you are not 4discussion at all, are you.

Mon, 30 Jan 2012 21:40:52 UTC | #912819