OneDumbG0
Find Your Own Fire
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
I'm glade found a life preserver to save your sinking argument, but next time you might try latching onto something that actually helps your case? Just so I know, how long are you going to flap your arms like a chicken while you try and keep your head above water with this strawmaning?
Bringing your inane rheteoric to the forefront of our conversation simply reveals the disingenuity of your "request" in this "debate." We're arguing about evidence in the first instance. You say it's invalid, arbitrarily, to the same extent as Wolverine's skeleton climbing out of a molten steel vat.
You then sit on your hands and facetiously ask for more evidence in the second instance to bolster the evidence in the first instance. We give it to you. You then PRETEND to be an arbiter over what evidence in the second instance is to qualify your arbitrary conclusions over the validity over what evidence is in the first instance is.
Do you really think your fake catch-22 or "moving the goalposts" strategy or false absolute fallacies stand up at all? Here's a coherent analogy: You're the criminal. Someone produces the smoking gun. You arbitrarily reject the smoking gun and ask for other evidence. Someone ends up producing the bloody knife. You reject the bloody knife and ask for other evidence.
So on. And so forth. What don't you get? That I don't see through your utterly transparent trolling? That anybody here doesn't get the joke that you don't actually give a crap about evidence and will twist any facts no matter how inane to pretend like we've not given you evidence int he first, let alone, second instance?
You're a troll. We get it. We've gotten over it. Some of us are beginning to question whether you've gotten over that fact. You should be laughing at my humor. Not working yourself up over it. The only thing to do here is to recognize the comedy. Lighten up.