| Subject: Re: Ruppert: Advice for Whistleblowers |
| From: no name |
| Date: 16/12/2003, 20:28 |
| Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.alien.research,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.paranet.abduct |
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:55:32 GMT, Wally Anglesea™
<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 17:34:58 GMT, no name <oobie@doobie.com> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:57:38 GMT, Wally Anglesea™
<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 01:23:20 GMT, no name <oobie@doobie.com> wrote:
Logic isn't your strong point is it, liar?
BWHA. Yeah it is, so is common sense.
Calling me a lair doesn't make me one. The burden of proof is on you to
prove me wrong -- go ahead fool.
Since you refuse to present any evidence that there is anything other
than sand at Groom Lake. Occams Razor suggests one of the following:
Occam says that the rule of parsimony applies. Simply: I'm telling the
truth.
1: You are a kook
2: you are a liar.
Unparsimonous answer, ding bat.
But accurate, kook.
You lose the argument again:
You've comitted the logical fallacy of name calling, or more aptly ad
hominem attack. You're also shooting the mesenger, another facet of the
same logical fallacy.
Nuff said.
The burden of proof is on *you* to show that what you have claimed
about Groom Lake is true.
Otherwise, stand as a liar.
Nope, a fact is a fact and can be verified.
But you refuse to do so. That makes you a liar.
Nope the burden is now on you to refute the fact. You can not refute it
because it's true all you are able to do is comit logical fallacies as cited
repeatedly, yet you do not comprehend.
You have not disputed the fact
other than to commit logical fallacies of name calling and shooting the
messenger.
post some *evidence*, kook
A fact does not need evidence a fact is either disputed or not. So far you
have not disputed the fact at all.
You lose, loser.