▲ 471 ▼ VERY concerned LMBO (lemmy.ml) submitted 11 months ago by jankforlife@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml 71 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago (4 children) And you've read zero of them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (3 children) Sounds like cope permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago (2 children) Someone once put together a book titled, "One Hundred Authors Against Einstein." Einstein dismissed the book with the quip, "Why one hundred? If I were really wrong, they'd only need one." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago (1 child) Sounds like a colossal reach at best, and pathetic cope at worst. You understand the colossal differences between multiple independent journalists researching and reporting on the same topic, and a large organized group of pseudointellectuals trying to disprove a single person based on vibes alone, right? You seem to be very desperately, and pathetically holding onto a form of fallacy of composition: https://practicalpie.com/fallacy-of-composition/ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago No, I'm simply calling out a lazy gish gallop. It's the same in both cases. How many sources are listed on the Wikipedia page for Christianity? If I accept your logic as valid, it seems I'll have to convert. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (3 children) Sounds like cope permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago (2 children) Someone once put together a book titled, "One Hundred Authors Against Einstein." Einstein dismissed the book with the quip, "Why one hundred? If I were really wrong, they'd only need one." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago (1 child) Sounds like a colossal reach at best, and pathetic cope at worst. You understand the colossal differences between multiple independent journalists researching and reporting on the same topic, and a large organized group of pseudointellectuals trying to disprove a single person based on vibes alone, right? You seem to be very desperately, and pathetically holding onto a form of fallacy of composition: https://practicalpie.com/fallacy-of-composition/ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago No, I'm simply calling out a lazy gish gallop. It's the same in both cases. How many sources are listed on the Wikipedia page for Christianity? If I accept your logic as valid, it seems I'll have to convert. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago (2 children) Someone once put together a book titled, "One Hundred Authors Against Einstein." Einstein dismissed the book with the quip, "Why one hundred? If I were really wrong, they'd only need one." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago (1 child) Sounds like a colossal reach at best, and pathetic cope at worst. You understand the colossal differences between multiple independent journalists researching and reporting on the same topic, and a large organized group of pseudointellectuals trying to disprove a single person based on vibes alone, right? You seem to be very desperately, and pathetically holding onto a form of fallacy of composition: https://practicalpie.com/fallacy-of-composition/ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago No, I'm simply calling out a lazy gish gallop. It's the same in both cases. How many sources are listed on the Wikipedia page for Christianity? If I accept your logic as valid, it seems I'll have to convert. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago (1 child) Sounds like a colossal reach at best, and pathetic cope at worst. You understand the colossal differences between multiple independent journalists researching and reporting on the same topic, and a large organized group of pseudointellectuals trying to disprove a single person based on vibes alone, right? You seem to be very desperately, and pathetically holding onto a form of fallacy of composition: https://practicalpie.com/fallacy-of-composition/ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago No, I'm simply calling out a lazy gish gallop. It's the same in both cases. How many sources are listed on the Wikipedia page for Christianity? If I accept your logic as valid, it seems I'll have to convert. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago No, I'm simply calling out a lazy gish gallop. It's the same in both cases. How many sources are listed on the Wikipedia page for Christianity? If I accept your logic as valid, it seems I'll have to convert. permalink fedilink source parent
