Wild speculations are not "valid arguments". At this point, the "argument" for the IRS scandal is as credible and valid as the claims of alien abductions, or that the Earth is actually flat, not a sphere.
There's no facts that support those, either. If the majority believed they were true, that wouldn't make aliens magically become real, nor would it magically change the shape of the Earth. How widespread a belief is has no bearing on its validity.
There's no facts saying that Obama DIDN'T do it, so the lack of these facts can be used as a valid argument for what?
The president's guilt?
What you're saying is that speculation of the majority, in the absence of facts, is enough to make an argument for guilt.
Are you mental? When in the other thread you were screaming about liberal bias on this forum, did you even realize that many conservative posters were saying you're completely loco, and telling you that you are wrong? In the absence of facts, the opinion of the majority CANNOT determine guilt.
Last edited by Cthulhu 2020; 2013-05-24 at 06:47 AM.
2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"
when you have a absent of fact it is what people do they speculate and politics is based on public perception.
if a majority consensus doesn't matter when it comes to perception in politics. politicians wouldn't use polls now would they. advertisers would not use them ether they would not make claims that the majority use my product there for it is better then the competition if it held no weight to do so
---------- Post added 2013-05-24 at 02:56 AM ----------
no all it says im not wrong for speculating that way with the absents of facts when the majority speculates the same. you cant say my speculation is crazy you cant make the argument my speculation is not main stream you cant say my speculation is on the fringe
You have read the fine print on those poll results, right?
As an example, this poll from the Gallup front page picked solely because it was the first poll on the Gallup front page; http://www.gallup.com/poll/162758/th...aspx?ref=image
Scroll to the bottom, read the fine print on the poll methodology. Two lines in particular;
The other way to phrase that is "5% of the time, these numbers will be completely and wildly incorrect, because this poll is basically just a guess."For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.
Next;
In other words, the chance that their poll is off is greater than that sampling error, because they may have introduced bias somewhere else.In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
And this is for a poll that's just trying to determine what the majority opinion is. Not whether that majority opinion is justified or valid. Politicians use polls to get an idea of what the people are thinking. They do NOT tell you a darned thing about whether the most popular option is true or not.
You are just wildly wrong, here, in just about every possible way you could have been wrong.
If you have an absence of evidence, there's only one logical conclusion. That you don't have enough information to make a call. If you're pushed to take a stance, then the only legitimate option is skepticism, where in an absence of evidence to support it, you assume that a claim is not true.
For instance, you could claim that there are invisible pink unicorns that are responsible for dark matter measurements in physics. Nobody can see them, because they're invisible. Logically, I can't prove that you're wrong; there's no evidence that allows me to do so. So, the only rational thing to do is to be skeptical, and assume there's no such thing as invisible pink unicorns.
If the majority of people believe in invisible pink unicorns? That just means the majority believe a really silly and senseless thing. It doesn't make unicorns exist through the magic of belief. The world doesn't work like that outside of children's cartoons, dude.
Last edited by Endus; 2013-05-24 at 07:00 AM.
Like I said before you are saying Obama is guilty until proven innocent. That is not how the justice system works. Just because he has motive and opportunity doesn't mean he said to do it. Just because you are a conspiracy theorist like Alex Jones doesn't mean its true.
Please Endus just close this thread, it devolved just like the last one did. Where Vyxn couldn't back up his claims and using unfounded rumors to say that Obama did it. Which isn't unsurprising from his posting history.
It's a good thing we live in the 21st century, in a constitutional republic, where the law states that speculation and main stream popular opinion cannot implicate someone's guilt.
2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"
i never made the claim of guilt
OMG please people figure out the difference between speculating and accusing
All of you are trying to argue against something a haven't done your shadow boxing against an argument that doesn't exist
because i have torn apart most other arguments on this thread you are trying to find one you think you can win so your fabricating one that doesn't exist, Im done with this you all shadow box agaisnt your self im not going to defend a arguement that i never made
Last edited by Vyxn; 2013-05-24 at 07:12 AM.
Throughout history, and even today, innocent people are imprisoned, tortured, and killed because the majority believes they did something and insists they must prove their innocence or they are guilty. In other words, provide evidence for who really committed a crime. Disease invades a village? The majority thinks it's that old woman that lives a mile outside of town. If she can't prove it wasn't her, then they burn her.
The justice system founded on the principle of innocent until proven guilty is by far the most just, and is what America was founded on. If you believe in witch hunts, then by all means go down that road, but you are flying in the face of what it means to be an American citizen.
2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"
It seems that most of this is:
You: "he might be guilty"
Everyone else: "there's no evidence to show he's guilty"
You: "BUT HE MIGHT BE GUILTY!"
Everyone else: "You can't call him guilty without any evidence"
You: "WHOA WHOA WHOA HEY, I NEVER said he was guilty....
...But he might be guilty..."
You aren't even arguing anything. An argument has to have a premise and a conclusion, you're only stating disjointed and unproven claims, passing them off as your premises, and then essentially insisting that you have no conclusion to your statement.
“Do not lose time on daily trivialities. Do not dwell on petty detail. For all of these things melt away and drift apart within the obscure traffic of time. Live well and live broadly. You are alive and living now. Now is the envy of all of the dead.” ~ Emily3, World of Tomorrow
Words to live by.
And yet you're completely wrong and have yet to tear anything apart, and your argument couldn't tear a wet paper bag apart. You keep saying that you're only speculating, yet you continue to try to implicate guilt on the principle of the majority backing you. Get some facts. Until then, your argument is rubbish.
2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"
you're wrong on several accounts here.
first, speculating someone's guilt IS accusation.
second, you haven't torn apart anyone's arguments.
third, your grammar is off and you are missing punctuation.
fourth, you're arguing for popular speculation being a proper argument, and the popular speculation in this thread is that you have no idea what you are talking about, and by your own logic, you are wrong.
fifth, speculation is not random nor is it without supporting evidence, you're just playing a blame game.
Infracted.
Last edited by mmoc58a2a4b64e; 2013-05-24 at 05:43 PM.
Should I go get you a backhoe to dig you out of the massive hole you have dug yourself? As everyone else has said speculating is accusing. Accusations usually come with some sort of evidence but when your own evidence was used against you, you casually ignored it. So again you are digging the same hole you had in the last thread that was made.
obviously none of you are informed enough to male any factual claims. first i never said Obama was directly connect. i made a speculation that he should be held somewhat responsible because the tone he set using Chicago style tactics. a conclusion that many respected columnist have made. take a look at the thread i started about it and you can see for your self.
the thread was locked because of the scandal deniers like you self get all opposite and use school yard bully tactics gang up and making false claims of crap i never did say . Inform your self here is the thread prove that i said Obama was directly connected http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...at-the-Top-WSJ
You cant can you so now your integrity and creditability is in question, yes im throwing that out there unless you can prove your claims im questioning you creditability and integrity. Just because MMO-C is a liberal echo chamber and you have a few misinformed ideologues echoing the same thing doesn't make what anything you say a fact. no one that is in the mainstream believe the same as you only 31% of America does while 56% thinks the same as I. your the one on the fringe your the one out of the mainstreams your your one that has buried your head in the sand and ignored all the facts
this thread alone i have proven that the scandal deniers are misinformed. i have corrected numerous falsehoods. I have proven with facts and case study you cant make an opening statement and then plead the 5th. i have proven with facts their wasn't a increase in IRS applications in the year the decided to do the illegal targeting. I have proven with facts it was only the conservative groups that was targeted. I have proven with facts it is illegal to do so under that hatch act. and i have proven with facts that Steven Miller has admitted the targeting was partisan, and all you got is an opinion from the IG inspector in a audit it wasn't even a investigation and that his opinion is not a well informed one because he didn't even investigate if it was politically motivated, he didn't even question any one out side the IRS about it so all you have to cling to is the "well he is innocent till proven guilty" that might work in a court of law but wake up we are not in a court of law. it is not how it works in public perception. when you plead the 5th when you lie when you cover up when you constantly say i don't know im not responsible for thing my job makes me responsible for it stinks of a crime so go ahead and desperate cling to the only two things you got which one has been been but into question because if the statement under oath by Steven miller because you have nothing else
you run around and personally attack anyone that threatens you shaky feeble narrative because you have nothing else you have nothing sir so unless you can prove anything with any facts you have nothing but personal attacks
I'm returning to this thread. Is their a summary of what the accusations are for both sides this morning?