Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Reply To Thread

Hand gun vs Chemical WeaponFollow

#202 Dec 19 2012 at 10:46 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,015 posts
Gbaji wrote:
Instead, you are using the word "accurate", which has a definition which does not really match what you are talking about.


Please explain how it doesn't.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#203 Dec 19 2012 at 2:33 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,579 posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfair_burden
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#204 Dec 19 2012 at 2:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:

That makes up 75% of the arrows in Gbaji's quiver so it's hard to feel too bad.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#205 Dec 19 2012 at 3:06 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,579 posts
Yeah, but it amused me to post it Smiley: lol
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#206 Dec 19 2012 at 5:04 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,015 posts
I hope that you're not somehow implying that by asking him to clarify his claim is an unfair burden. That would be really ridiculous.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#207 Dec 19 2012 at 5:52 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,731 posts
Almalieque wrote:
I hope that you're not somehow implying that by asking him to clarify his claim is an unfair burden. That would be really ridiculous.


He's not, so it's not.

I have clarified my claim far more than should be required. What is an unfair burden is you demanding that I prove what the definition of a word you are using doesn't mean. Nowhere in the definition of "accurate" will you find the words "does not mean weapons of mass destruction", thus I can't meet the criteria you've demanded. What I can do is provide another word with a definition which matches what you're saying far far better than the word you are using.

Which is precisely what I've done at least 3 times already.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#208 Dec 19 2012 at 6:13 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,015 posts
GbajiI wrote:

have clarified my claim far more than should be required.


Then please quote it, because all you have done is said "that doesn't fit". You have not provided a countering definition.

Gbaji wrote:
What is an unfair burden is you demanding that I prove what the definition of a word you are using doesn't mean.


How so? If I can provide several definitions that match my intent, the burden is on you to show how those definitions don't match my intent. You just can't say "you're doing it wrong" without some proof other than what you think. If it isn't defined somewhere outside of your own head, then it's simply your opinion, which is nice, but not absolute.

Gbaji wrote:
Nowhere in the definition of "accurate" will you find the words "does not mean weapons of mass destruction", thus I can't meet the criteria you've demanded.


That's an absurd counter. Of course the definition will not say that because that's not how definitions work. My "criterion" isn't to some how change the definition, but to provide a countering definition that would exclude WMD from accuracy. Even the definition of WMD supports it. So, the burden is on you to provide ANY definition of anything that contradicts that claim. Given that WMD can very well be accurate depending on how they are used is the reason why you can't meet my criterion.

Gbaji wrote:
What I can do is provide another word with a definition which matches what you're saying far far better than the word you are using.

Which is precisely what I've done at least 3 times already.


Correction, that's what you attempted. You say "effective" is a better word, but based off of weapons that are "off 200 feet from their target". When I asked you to provide me these weapons that are "off the target" and their status of details, you failed to do so. Primarily because you just made up stuff.

My argument isn't that EVERY WMD is accurate, but WMD can be accurate if used correctly. I asked you if you believe if WMD can be accurate, then you say "WMD" can't be accurate because its a payload. Then I provided definitions that contradicts that claim. Then the circle of elusiveness continues.

All you have done this entire time is say "Nu-uh". You have not provided any evidence to support your opinions.

Edited, Dec 20th 2012 2:14am by Almalieque
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#209 Dec 19 2012 at 10:29 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,579 posts
Almalieque wrote:
I hope that you're not somehow implying that by asking him to clarify his claim is an unfair burden. That would be really ridiculous.


Nope. It was intended to amuse me, which it did, and humor is allowed to be ridiculous.
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#210 Dec 19 2012 at 10:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
2,579 posts
Almalieque wrote:
All you have done this entire time is say "Nu-uh". You have not provided any evidence to support your opinions.


This is his M.O. Have you not been paying attention.

/stirringthepot
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#211 Dec 20 2012 at 4:45 AM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
All you have done this entire time is say "Nu-uh". You have not provided any evidence to support your opinions.


This is his M.O. Have you not been paying attention.

/stirringthepot
You're talking to Alma here, with some luck he'll have the concept figured out by 2027.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 40 All times are in CDT
Debalic, Jophiel, lolgaxe, Szabo, Xsarus, Anonymous Guests (35)