Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
False!False!Argumentum ad populum fallicy.Not false at all. Plenty of people agree with my stricter definition of genocide.
No, because I didn't make my statement appear to be fact. saying others share my opinion of something does not get to the level of a logical fallacy, because I am making no statement of fact.
Lol!
Nope, I am correct in this.
argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is afallacious argument that concludes that aproposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."
This type of argument is known by several names,[1] including appeal to the masses,appeal to belief, appeal to the majority,appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity,argument by consensus, consensus fallacy,authority of the many, and bandwagon fallacy(also known as a vox populi),[2] and in Latinas argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect. The Chinese proverb "three men make a tiger" concerns the same idea.
"I agree the term decimate is being incorrectly used unless it is talking about 10% losses."- martyr began.False! you changed it only after Ringel05 brought it up, now you are playing CYA with it.And again, you use a martyr specific definition.The definition has evolved.
The definition has been replaced in this case, not evolved.
No, I used the classical definition of decimate, which comes from killing of 1 of 10 roman soldiers in a unit as punishment.
When did I use the term decimate?
Another false assumption.It's all that's needed.Should is subjective .My point is meanings of some words and phrases are adapted over time whether we like it or not, it's something we humans have done since the inception of language. Bad can mean bad or it can mean awesome, cool can be temperature related or can mean neat which can also mean tidy or served unchilled, unmixed as an alcoholic drink.
The problem is that by adapting genocide to include "lesser" offenses, one removes the gravity of the word, and what it should mean. It's the same thing progressives do with the terms racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.
Fail.
is that they best you got, bitch-tits?
Wrong.
Rationalizing like a bitch.False!False!Argumentum ad populum fallicy.
No, because I didn't make my statement appear to be fact. saying others share my opinion of something does not get to the level of a logical fallacy, because I am making no statement of fact.
Lol!
Nope, I am correct in this.
argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is afallacious argument that concludes that aproposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."
This type of argument is known by several names,[1] including appeal to the masses,appeal to belief, appeal to the majority,appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity,argument by consensus, consensus fallacy,authority of the many, and bandwagon fallacy(also known as a vox populi),[2] and in Latinas argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect. The Chinese proverb "three men make a tiger" concerns the same idea.
Again, i did not allude to the factual nature of my opinion, I recognize there are other opinions of it as well. What I said is there are others that share my opinion of the word being limited to wholesale government mandated killing of an entire group of people purely for the sake of killing them.
But keep posting and linking to things you don't understand. That works.....
"I agree the term decimate is being incorrectly used unless it is talking about 10% losses."- martyr began.False! you changed it only after Ringel05 brought it up, now you are playing CYA with it.And again, you use a martyr specific definition.The definition has been replaced in this case, not evolved.
No, I used the classical definition of decimate, which comes from killing of 1 of 10 roman soldiers in a unit as punishment.
When did I use the term decimate?
Don't bother trying to rationalize .
Another false assumption.It's all that's needed.Should is subjective .The problem is that by adapting genocide to include "lesser" offenses, one removes the gravity of the word, and what it should mean. It's the same thing progressives do with the terms racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.
Fail.
is that they best you got, bitch-tits?
Wrong.
Btw my post count rises too .
Unlike you I don't use meaningless stats to bolster my ego.
Rationalizing like a bitch.False!False!No, because I didn't make my statement appear to be fact. saying others share my opinion of something does not get to the level of a logical fallacy, because I am making no statement of fact.
Lol!
Nope, I am correct in this.
argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is afallacious argument that concludes that aproposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."
This type of argument is known by several names,[1] including appeal to the masses,appeal to belief, appeal to the majority,appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity,argument by consensus, consensus fallacy,authority of the many, and bandwagon fallacy(also known as a vox populi),[2] and in Latinas argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect. The Chinese proverb "three men make a tiger" concerns the same idea.
Again, i did not allude to the factual nature of my opinion, I recognize there are other opinions of it as well. What I said is there are others that share my opinion of the word being limited to wholesale government mandated killing of an entire group of people purely for the sake of killing them.
But keep posting and linking to things you don't understand. That works.....
The question was where you used the term ."I agree the term decimate is being incorrectly used unless it is talking about 10% losses."- martyr began.False! you changed it only after Ringel05 brought it up, now you are playing CYA with it.And again, you use a martyr specific definition.
No, I used the classical definition of decimate, which comes from killing of 1 of 10 roman soldiers in a unit as punishment.
When did I use the term decimate?
Don't bother trying to rationalize .
Yes. What is wrong with that? That is where the term came from, and to use it to describe anything else is to use the term wrongly.
There's that childish need for an ego stroke again.Another false assumption.It's all that's needed.Should is subjective .
Fail.
is that they best you got, bitch-tits?
Wrong.
Btw my post count rises too .
Unlike you I don't use meaningless stats to bolster my ego.
yet you are the one with the obsession here. But keep it up, I like replying to JV level posts by grade school level trolls. Om nom nom nom.
Fact.Rationalizing like a bitch.False!False!
Lol!
Nope, I am correct in this.
argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is afallacious argument that concludes that aproposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."
This type of argument is known by several names,[1] including appeal to the masses,appeal to belief, appeal to the majority,appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity,argument by consensus, consensus fallacy,authority of the many, and bandwagon fallacy(also known as a vox populi),[2] and in Latinas argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect. The Chinese proverb "three men make a tiger" concerns the same idea.
Again, i did not allude to the factual nature of my opinion, I recognize there are other opinions of it as well. What I said is there are others that share my opinion of the word being limited to wholesale government mandated killing of an entire group of people purely for the sake of killing them.
But keep posting and linking to things you don't understand. That works.....
Nope.
The question was where you used the term ."I agree the term decimate is being incorrectly used unless it is talking about 10% losses."- martyr began.False! you changed it only after Ringel05 brought it up, now you are playing CYA with it.No, I used the classical definition of decimate, which comes from killing of 1 of 10 roman soldiers in a unit as punishment.
When did I use the term decimate?
Don't bother trying to rationalize .
Yes. What is wrong with that? That is where the term came from, and to use it to describe anything else is to use the term wrongly.
Don't get more bitchy become you got what you asked for.
More rationalizing. .
There's that childish need for an ego stroke again.Another false assumption.It's all that's needed.is that they best you got, bitch-tits?
Wrong.
Btw my post count rises too .
Unlike you I don't use meaningless stats to bolster my ego.
yet you are the one with the obsession here. But keep it up, I like replying to JV level posts by grade school level trolls. Om nom nom nom.
Fact.Rationalizing like a bitch.False!Nope, I am correct in this.
argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is afallacious argument that concludes that aproposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."
This type of argument is known by several names,[1] including appeal to the masses,appeal to belief, appeal to the majority,appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity,argument by consensus, consensus fallacy,authority of the many, and bandwagon fallacy(also known as a vox populi),[2] and in Latinas argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect. The Chinese proverb "three men make a tiger" concerns the same idea.
Again, i did not allude to the factual nature of my opinion, I recognize there are other opinions of it as well. What I said is there are others that share my opinion of the word being limited to wholesale government mandated killing of an entire group of people purely for the sake of killing them.
But keep posting and linking to things you don't understand. That works.....
Nope.
false the inference is all yours.The question was where you used the term ."I agree the term decimate is being incorrectly used unless it is talking about 10% losses."- martyr began.False! you changed it only after Ringel05 brought it up, now you are playing CYA with it.
When did I use the term decimate?
Don't bother trying to rationalize .
Yes. What is wrong with that? That is where the term came from, and to use it to describe anything else is to use the term wrongly.
Don't get more bitchy become you got what you asked for.
More rationalizing. .
No, you were implying i used it wrong somewhere, and I am asking for a reference.
More wishful imaging.There's that childish need for an ego stroke again.Another false assumption.It's all that's needed.
Wrong.
Btw my post count rises too .
Unlike you I don't use meaningless stats to bolster my ego.
yet you are the one with the obsession here. But keep it up, I like replying to JV level posts by grade school level trolls. Om nom nom nom.
I do enjoy living rent free in your head, considering the lack of space paying for it would be a waste.
FactFact.Rationalizing like a bitch.False!
argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is afallacious argument that concludes that aproposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."
This type of argument is known by several names,[1] including appeal to the masses,appeal to belief, appeal to the majority,appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity,argument by consensus, consensus fallacy,authority of the many, and bandwagon fallacy(also known as a vox populi),[2] and in Latinas argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect. The Chinese proverb "three men make a tiger" concerns the same idea.
Again, i did not allude to the factual nature of my opinion, I recognize there are other opinions of it as well. What I said is there are others that share my opinion of the word being limited to wholesale government mandated killing of an entire group of people purely for the sake of killing them.
But keep posting and linking to things you don't understand. That works.....
Nope.
Nope.
The blacks were enslaved, raped and murdered for over 200 years.
But that's nothing compared to the genocide of 11 million Native Americans that had their land stolen, their women and children raped and slaughtered, and herded into concentration camps in the name of God and the American flag.
They were poisoned by Smallpox in the blankets they were given. The women's breasts were cut off and used for tobacco pouches.
And now Trump and his Christian followers ask the blacks, "What have you got to lose?"
