Hello soulcalm17

[Ivan Denisovich]

I thought the grandiose presentation of the long list of some of the greatest historical thinkers and philosophers who've ever existed alongside the pretentious name dropping of Plato, was pretty funny, given it was being used purely as a bare appeal to authority fallacy. I guess they didn't cover common logical fallacies in his philosophical studies? 

Theists and wannabe philosophers love to use multitude of words to cover the fact that assertions is all they have.

As for fallacies - they were covered during my philosophical courses but I would wager that most online "philosophers" did not actually studied philosophy and it shows. Sophistry does not good argument make.

Though for me the real comedy gold was this claim:

Well, there are a number of very smart people who think that numbers do have existence independent of human minds. Roger Penrose, for example. 

  It took every ounce of self control I possess, not to just respond with "so fucking what?"

The insults to my intellectuality vanity were brilliant, if he'd have asked I'd have told him plainly, I am a middling intellect, with a mediocre formal education, but then I hadn't realised his Christian god only wants to convince and save post graduate philosophers. 

For the record, my ego isn't so fragile that I'd take offence, I just know an appeal to authority fallacy when I see one, and when someone is dodging questions, and evading points it just becomes a little more likely they're holding an empty bag.

I mostly don't bother with theists or people who are unnecessarily wordy. After all it is brevity that is the soul of the wit not verbal vomit.