6/12/2013 2:48 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/12/2013 2:40:00 PM (view original):
So we can now respond to specific arguments and you won't try to expand it to another situation?

186 pages in and I see something new come around.
I guess it depends on whether or not I'm posting at a time you consider "acceptable Internet **** around time."
6/12/2013 2:53 PM
God bistiza's an idiot.  Any freshman college logic course would tell you your argument on the last page is incorrect and the logic doesn't work, but you just refuse to see it...
6/12/2013 2:55 PM
Posted by bistiza on 6/12/2013 2:45:00 PM (view original):
I was responding to a specific argument. I'm sorry if you misunderstood.
I understood perfectly. You used flawed reasoning while responding to a specific argument, and you're angry because you didn't mean for that to happen and only wanted the reasoning to be applied to your examples rather than to other things, even though that's not how it works in the real world.
Just because something doesn't have an impact on the human race doesn't mean it's ok. There are other considerations.

So now you're admitting your reasoning was flawed. You do realize, of course, that means your whole argument was flawed since it was based on that flawed reasoning.
So we can now respond to specific arguments and you won't try to expand it to another situation?

Anyone can respond to specific arguments at any time. Just don't try to warp reality by demanding your line of reasoning can only be applied to the specific circumstance you want to use it for.
I give up. You win. Clearly there are other considerations as to whether or not something is ok.
6/12/2013 2:55 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 6/12/2013 2:48:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/12/2013 2:40:00 PM (view original):
So we can now respond to specific arguments and you won't try to expand it to another situation?

186 pages in and I see something new come around.
I guess it depends on whether or not I'm posting at a time you consider "acceptable Internet **** around time."
I've decided that special types of losers can get up, take a **** and argue on the internet at 6 AM.  You qualify.

So now, if you would, answer the question.   Can the rest of us say "No, my statement only applies to this very specific situation" and you'll say "OK"?
6/12/2013 3:00 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/12/2013 2:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/12/2013 2:48:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/12/2013 2:40:00 PM (view original):
So we can now respond to specific arguments and you won't try to expand it to another situation?

186 pages in and I see something new come around.
I guess it depends on whether or not I'm posting at a time you consider "acceptable Internet **** around time."
I've decided that special types of losers can get up, take a **** and argue on the internet at 6 AM.  You qualify.

So now, if you would, answer the question.   Can the rest of us say "No, my statement only applies to this very specific situation" and you'll say "OK"?
Yes
6/12/2013 3:59 PM
Cool.  In the specific instance of A) an entirely homosexual population or B) couples who wait until 35 to have children, which would be more damaging to the world as we know it?
6/12/2013 4:11 PM
C) Zombie Apocalypse 
6/12/2013 4:12 PM
A

Do we have an entire population of either?
6/12/2013 4:22 PM
OK, now that we've established that an entire population of peoples practicing homosexuality would be very damaging to the future of the world, would you consider homosexuality to be A) natural even though it would be the end of the world as we know it or B) unnatural as we have established that we need people to reproduce regardless of their age?
6/12/2013 4:30 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/12/2013 4:22:00 PM (view original):
OK, now that we've established that an entire population of peoples practicing homosexuality would be very damaging to the future of the world, would you consider homosexuality to be A) natural even though it would be the end of the world as we know it or B) unnatural as we have established that we need people to reproduce regardless of their age?
A) natural. We don't have an entire population of homosexuals and sexuality isn't a choice.
6/12/2013 4:32 PM
Posted by dahsdebater on 6/12/2013 2:53:00 PM (view original):
God bistiza's an idiot.  Any freshman college logic course would tell you your argument on the last page is incorrect and the logic doesn't work, but you just refuse to see it...
Why does that argument get singled out for its idiocy? What about me?





signed,

I chose to be straight based on my levels of attraction to each gender
6/12/2013 6:56 PM
OK, if homosexuality is natural would be A) possible for the entire population to naturally be homosexual or B) well, there is no B because humans can't control nature.
6/12/2013 7:15 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/12/2013 6:56:00 PM (view original):
OK, if homosexuality is natural would be A) possible for the entire population to naturally be homosexual or B) well, there is no B because humans can't control nature.
No, it's not possible for the entire population to be homosexual.
6/12/2013 7:15 PM
Or maybe it is. I have no idea.

What's your point?
6/12/2013 7:16 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 6/12/2013 7:15:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/12/2013 6:56:00 PM (view original):
OK, if homosexuality is natural would be A) possible for the entire population to naturally be homosexual or B) well, there is no B because humans can't control nature.
No, it's not possible for the entire population to be homosexual.
Have you discovered a way to control nature?  

Why are you here and not stopping hurricanes and ****?   You'd be famous and rich. 
of 358

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.