(October 26, 2011 at 8:31 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: The only problem here is that it does follow. You yourself helped prove it when you couldn’t give account for the laws of logic even though you believe they are true.And this logical fallacy is called the argument from ignorance (mingled in with shifting the burden of proof.
Another example: I can account for the laws of logic because prancing invisible unicorns tell me to use logic. You can't prove invisible prancing unicorns don't exist and so I must be right.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
