View Single Post
Old 15th December 2015, 09:53 AM   #2036
Fiend God
Belz...'s Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
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.
Sorry, Jay. Jabba only addresses the first q/c in a post, which in your case is:

But you don't address their arguments.
Which is an insult, I'm sure, leaving him free to ignore everything.
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... 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