RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
February 6, 2015 at 6:06 pm
(This post was last modified: February 6, 2015 at 6:07 pm by Heywood.)
(February 6, 2015 at 6:01 pm)Chas Wrote:(February 6, 2015 at 5:58 pm)Heywood Wrote: I'll change my title next to my avatar to "moron" if you or anyone else can provide an example of something which is true of all polygons but is not true of all triangles. If nobody can in 24 hours will you change your title to "moron"?
You did not quote my entire response.
"You have that inverted. Everything true about all polygons is true for all triangles and all rectangles and all the rest.
However, what is true for all triangles is not necessarily true for all polygons nor all rectangles."
You keep asuming that your subset is equivalent to the whole set when that is what you are trying prove. Fallacy city.
I quoted the relevant part. Reading the fucking exchange you mental munchkin. I said what is true of all polygons is true of all triangles. Simonmoon replied "true" and then you replied "false". Your claim that my true statement is false is a monumental failure.