LogFAQs > #905702162

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, Database 3 ( 02.21.2018-07.23.2018 ), DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Topic List
Page List: 1
TopicMy friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children."
Kyuubi4269
07/25/18 2:15:35 PM
#189:


darkknight109 posted...
So the family just exists in some quantum state of being both thrown out and not thrown out? Interesting idea, but one that doesn't gel with reality.

It gels with how you have to handle data. People want to make computers with a trinary base code with the third option being a "maybe" to help with logical computation. This is also like using imaginary numbers to achieve a correct result.

darkknight109 posted...
Again, you seem to be labouring under the misunderstanding that both claims are equally valid; they're not. Sure, based on the information given, we cannot definitively say that the family was or wasn't tossed out, but that doesn't mean all possibilities are equally likely.

When neither have anything to support them, they're equally unproven. They are equally likely until further evidence is presented to support one or the other.

darkknight109 posted...
For instance, what if I said the friend actually didn't get tossed out? Sure, the OP said he did, but maybe the TC was lying. So, really, it's equally likely that the friend stayed and the family was executed by a squad of ninja assassins that the friend was the grandmaster of, right? Sure, I have no evidence for anything in this paragraph, but as you just said absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

The TC was there so his word carries weight. Evidence can be false, but its weight is considered regardless. If false evidence had no weight then we wouldn't have conflicting evidence.

To counter your hyperbole, if you don't have evidence that the friend doesn't or couldn't know a ninja grandmaster, ninjas didn't or couldn't have killed them or the family isn't dead then it's perfectly legitimate. However that claim is easily fact checked and ruled out immediately so its theoretical legitimacy is irrelevant.

darkknight109 posted...
*claims woman didn't have to do anything before immediately claiming she had to do something*

I think I'm starting to understand why you're having trouble with these issues regarding logical consistencies.

Doing nothing isn't doing something, I can see how this is difficult for you.

darkknight109 posted...
see my previous challenge from earlier in this topic: go into a school or onto a playground or somewhere where there's a lot of kids present and start swearing loudly. You might be interested to learn what society really believes.

Because that's totally the same thing. I made an apples for apples comparative example I could do for you, you failed to take the bet against your nonsense, you pussied out of gaining some empirical evidence so you lose your right to complain on this point.
---
Scloud posted...
Its like he wants two things at the same time.
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1