(October 21, 2015 at 5:05 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(October 21, 2015 at 2:26 am)Parkers Tan Wrote:
You apparently don't know much about fallacies, nor sarcasm. Argumentum ex culo is a sardonic way of telling you you're pulling your argument out of your ass. It's not actually a logical fallacy as much as it is simply an unsupported assertion.
I did gather that when I looked it up... However I don't understand the complaint. Is my understanding of algebra faulty, or can I add apples and oranges, to get a total number of apples.
(October 21, 2015 at 2:26 am)Parkers Tan Wrote:
This is the ex culo part, because Christianity posits a personal god. He is not a title, he is a being. You're trying to have it both ways when you argue this.
I believe I said being.
(October 21, 2015 at 2:26 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: So you worship a schizophrenic, then. Got it.
I don't believe that is accurate.
(October 21, 2015 at 2:26 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: Yes, I'm aware of that unsubstantiated claim, too. Until I see a basis for accepting it, it too goes into the scrapheap. It's all very convenient to posit a truism that cannot be verified at all -- convenient, but not convincing.OK...I'm familiar with pseudo-skepticism and it is expected.
Non-answers. Revise and resubmit. D-.
