View Single Post
Old 15th December 2015, 09:39 AM   #2032
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,513
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
So far, I don't agree with why others don't count Entry#2 as evidence.
But you don't address their arguments. You simply reiterate that you'd like to keep believing in what you've been claiming. Disagreement without a rational explanation is just intransigence.

Address these points and then maybe your denial might have a rational basis.

1. The operant conclusion is a speculative inference without support.

2. The inference is drawn by Marino and Prior, who are not experts, not by the cited authority.

3. The inference is one of several possible antecedents; you consider only it.

4. The consequent is directly refuted by competent expertise.

5. The rationale from speculative inference to consequent is contravened by pertinent testimony which the authors misrepresent.

Quote:
Whatever, I'll go back and rethink their explanations.
Unless you plan on actually addressing any of those explanations with anything more potent than denial and doubt, you're just proposing another spin of the hamster wheel. This would tend to confirm the criticism that you don't intend to have a serious discussion.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top