Statistikhengst
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #81
UNCONSTITUTIONAL UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE
You see this, class?
A claim is made ("Jade Helm is unconstitutional") and the claimant is saying it is true until disproven. This is a favorite tactic of retards who cannot prove their claims and so they attempt to shift the burden of proof onto the skeptic. In this case, the claimant is unable to prove Jade Helm is unconstitutional, and thus throws up a logical fallacy to cover his inability to do so.
This logical fallacy is appropriately called the Argument from Ignorance
Question #1
MR DINGLE BERRY
IS IT A HISTORICAL FACT THAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS AND THE COLONISTS OPPOSED STANDING ARMIES?!?!?!?!!?
.
.
And when you write in really big text, do you feel more important, little contomu?