3 ms·
Ahh yes. Argumentum ad verecundiam. Let's bash a guy because he hangs out with someone you dislike instead of refuting his centrals points. You're total the pe
by viggity 12y ago
Ahh yes. Argumentum ad verecundiam. Let's bash a guy because he hangs out with someone you dislike instead of refuting his centrals points.
You're total the person I trust to make logical arguments.
- lotsofmangos 12y agoWe are talking about someone who doxxes scientists he disagrees with as a debating tactic and then justifies it on the basis that he receives hate mail, so why shouldn't they.
- hyperbovine 12y agoOoh Latin! Fancy. His central points are eminently refutable, but in my experience trying to have a rational, scientific debate with this crowd leads nowhere. And anyways, Guess what! Personal behavior matters. Somebody whose professional history is full of instances of lying and willfully distorting the truth in order to peddle his agenda (http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/12/27/climate-change-misinformer-of-the-year-marc-mor/191878 http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/12/27/climate-change-m...) is not a credible witness.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 12y agoI think the swift boat stuff alone puts him firmly in the camp of 'people who have shown themselves not to be trustworthy with the facts'.