--- In [email protected], new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], off_world_beings <no_reply@>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], new.morning <no_reply@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], off_world_beings <no_reply@>
> > > >
> > > > Therefore, the challenge is for you anti-science fundies to come
> > on
> > > > YouTube and debate me in a vlog.
> > > >
> > > > Yes folks, I am willing to put my face in a video defending
> > science.
> > > > However, the fundies here will find pathetic excuses to not take
> > me
> > > > up on that. The reason is that they are afraid to be seen going
> > > > around saying that the modern scientific process is wrong, and
> > that
> > > > their opinion is more important than science.
> > >
> > >
> > > Well first, you need to clarify to the world if you are still
> > beating
> > > your wife.>>
> >
> > Why are you saying such disgusting things?
> > Does anyone know this guys real name please.
> >
> > No really, does anyone know his real name?
> >
> > Rick I want this guy banned for a month for saying that lie. I won't
> > accept anything less. I will take this to the courts if this guy is
> > not banned for a month. I'm serious.
> >
> > What is his real name anyone?
> >
> > I am taking this to court Rick if he is not banned for a month for
> > this.
> >
> > Tom Barlow
> > Vermont
> >
> Good one. You are definately honing your satirical skills of
> portraying fanatics. Imagine, suing someone for the most common of all
> replies to someone making silly claims about others. A plurium
> interrogationum. That would be quite funny in court. Perhaps Marek
> would be so kind to defend me. What would be my defense in this case?
> Aside from cream pies, and clown shoes.
>
> "Many questions, also known as complex question, presupposition,
> loaded question, "trick question", or plurium interrogationum (Latin,
> "of many questions"), is an informal fallacy. It is committed when
> someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been
> proven or accepted by all the people involved. This fallacy is often
> used rhetorically, so that the question limits direct replies to those
> that serve the questioner's agenda. An example of this is the question
> "Are you still beating your wife?"
>
> Whether the respondent answers yes or no, he will admit to having a
> wife, and having beaten her at some time in the past. Thus, these
> facts are presupposed by the question, and if it has not been agreed
> upon by the speakers before, the question is improper, and the fallacy
> of many questions has been committed.
>
> The fallacy relies upon context for its effect: the fact that a
> question presupposes something does not in itself make the question
> fallacious. Only when some of these presuppositions are not
> necessarily agreed to by the person who is asked the question does the
> argument containing them become fallacious."
>
