Distort the username above you

Started by Vinny Valentine31 pages

Wow.

Strangles you just trumped him.

You did not use my logic. Don't lie.

And I made a mistake when I said distortion=change. They are not the exact same thing. However, they are the same. To change something, you do not have to distort it, but you do have to change something to distort it. It's a logical impossibility to distort something without changing it.

Therefore, duplicate thread. There's no avoiding it.

Originally posted by Seraphim XIII
Halftruth, Logical Fallacy.
are you saying that the law of syllogism isn't a real component of logic? How delusional are you?

Originally posted by Vinny Valentine
Wow.

Strangles you just trumped him.

He did. I'll man up and say my logic was faulty on my part.

Can he admit his logical faults as well?

"Distort = to change"

^ Recalling it, Strangelove?

Originally posted by Strangelove
You did not use my logic. Don't lie.

And I made a mistake when I said distortion=change. They are not the exact same thing. However, they are the same. To change something, you do not have to distort it, but you do have to change something to distort it. It's a logical impossibility to distort something without changing it.

Therefore, duplicate thread. There's no avoiding it.

I respect that you can man up to your mistake.

Wait, what? They are the same? Here we go again!

No, you're being fundamentally extreme. It's logically breakable in itself. Distortion and change are two different animals. Sure, one had to strive off the other for a function, but the fact they do not MUTUALLY function off of each other is proof of their immediate difference.

"To change something, you do not have to distort it, but you do have to change something to distort it."

^ This renders them different. Just deal with it, man.

Originally posted by Seraphim XIII
I respect that you can man up to your mistake.

Wait, what? They are the same? Here we go again!

No, you're being fundamentally extreme. It's logically breakable in itself. Distortion and change are two different animals. Sure, one had to strive off the other for a function, but the fact they do not MUTUALLY function off of each other is proof of their immediate difference.

"To change something, [b]you do not have to distort it, but you do have to change something to distort it."

^ This renders them different. Just deal with it, man. [/B]

I just wish that you would own up to your own mistakes.

I realize that distort and change are not the exact same thing, like I just said. However, this is a duplicate thread. While you are arguing the semantics of word definitions, the fundamental truth remains.

Duplicate thread.

Originally posted by Vinny Valentine
This is a Duplicate Thread.
Originally posted by Impediment
This is, essentially, a dupe thread.

Originally posted by Strangelove
[B]I just wish that you would own up to your own mistakes.

I wish you'd do the same.

I realize that distort and change are not the exact same thing, like I just said. However, this is a duplicate thread. While you are arguing the semantics of word definitions, the fundamental truth remains.

You came in here with that notion. I stomped that, then you changed your mind to suit your debate. No, the fundamental truth does not remain. They simply are not the same and serve as different functions. Bottom line.

Duplicate thread.

Change = Change.

Distort = Distort.

Originally posted by Seraphim XIII
You came in here with that notion. I stomped that, then you changed your mind to suit your debate.
a) you did not 'stomp' it. This is a duplicate thread
b) where did I 'change my mind'? My point has always been that this is a duplicate thread. That never changed. The argument may have evolved, but the point at the heart of it remained the same

Originally posted by Seraphim XIII
I wish you'd do the same.
I did own up to my mistake. You said it yourself.

Originally posted by Strangelove
a) you did not 'stomp' it. This is a duplicate thread
b) where did I 'change my mind'? My point has always been that this is a duplicate thread. That never changed. The argument may have evolved, but the point at the heart of it remained the same

A) You're simply wrong.

B) Strawman Fallacy, my friend.

Originally posted by Strangelove
I did own up to my mistake. You said it yourself.

Oh my god, READ!

Originally posted by Seraphim XIII
I respect that you can man up to your mistake.

Wait, what? They are the same? Here we go again!

Originally posted by Seraphim XIII
B) Strawman Fallacy, my friend.
I'm sorry, strawman fallacy? what the hell is that supposed to mean?

edit: I'm sorry, you are guilty of being the straw man, not me

Originally posted by Seraphim XIII
Oh my god, READ!
and again, I'm aware that they are not the exact same thing. Still. Duplicate thread

The straw man fallacy is an informal fallacy which is committed whenever someone argues against a position which the other person does not actually hold.

Ceterum censeo OTF esse delendam.

How I see it:[list][*]Rename Storm: Kat (for example)
[*]Distort Storm: Stirm (for example)
[/list]

Originally posted by Storm
The straw man fallacy is an informal fallacy which is committed whenever someone argues against a position which the other person does not actually hold.

Ceterum censeo OTF esse delendam.

How I see it:[list][*]Rename Storm: Kat (for example)
[*]Distort Storm: Stirm (for example)
[/list]

*sigh*

Howilearnedtostopworryingandlovethebomb

Originally posted by LifeInSepia
Howilearnedtostopworryingandlovethebomb
LivingWithBrown

stangleove

LiveInSerbia

strangeglove, whichb is how i read it the first 20 times i saw it.

Originally posted by Storm
The straw man fallacy is an informal fallacy which is committed whenever someone argues against a position which the other person does not actually hold.

Ceterum censeo OTF esse delendam.

How I see it:[list][*]Rename Storm: Kat (for example)
[*]Distort Storm: Stirm (for example)
[/list]

Thats Bullshit.

Clear and Simple: When you Distort something, It has changed

😐 BS, I learned that in grade ****ing 2.

Honestly, its been provedl ike 7 times by all kinds of people in this thread already.