Invalid Arguments

[durangodawood]

Coupled with your argument of authority.

Argument from authority - Wikipedia

Whats so bad about invoking the opinion of people who have studied an issue?

I think authority carries weight - when that authority is granted by institutions of enduring reputation.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Whats so bad about invoking the opinion of people who have studied an issue?

I think authority carries weight - when that authority is granted by institutions of enduring reputation.

What enduring reputation? Every few years everything they believed was true was falsified.

It’s like astronomy and the belief in Star formation. Every single observation in the past decade has shown their theory to be incorrect, yet they ignore the observations and continue on as if nothing has happened.

Those astronomers and cosmologists that predicted wrong what we would find, their authority was granted by those same institutions that taught them the incorrect theory to begin with.

But that’s what they were taught, and so that is what they will believe, despite the falsifying observations. Instead they will tweak their epicycles and add another circle to the mix, and proclaim all is well in wonderland....

 

[durangodawood]

What enduring reputation? Every few years everything they believed was true was falsified.

It’s like astronomy and the belief in Star formation. Every single observation in the past decade has shown their theory to be incorrect, yet they ignore the observations and continue on as if nothing has happened.

Those astronomers and cosmologists that predicted wrong what we would find, their authority was granted by those same institutions that taught them the incorrect theory to begin with.

But that’s what they were taught, and so that is what they will believe, despite the falsifying observations. Instead they will tweak their epicycles and add another circle to the mix, and proclaim all is well in wonderland....

Thats an outrageous expectation: that something so remote in time and space as star formation would just be explained in one sudden burst of knowledge. It ridiculous. In time it will get sorted out - by scientists, not by people griping on the internet.

 

[Speedwell]

He had an elaborate series of mathmatical epicycles built to explain the earth at the center of the solar system, which explained quite well the observations of the other planets from this belief. Although wrong, it was the scientific belief at the time.

Deferent and epicycle - Wikipedia

Oh. You mean Ptolemy.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Thats an outrageous expectation: that something so remote in time and space as star formation would just be explained in one sudden burst of knowledge. It ridiculous. In time it will get sorted out - by scientists, not by people griping on the internet.

It’s already been sorted out. I could show you the theory that already correctly predicted what we would find, but it’s not what you were taught to believe, and so you will reject it, even if both the sciences involved are themselves taught in those institutions of authority you believe in.

The differences being one predicted correctly what we would find, while the other got every single thing wrong. But you will reject those that got it right and only accept preaching from those that didn’t get anything right.

Worked out in time. It was worked out already by those using laboratory experiments with what constitutes 99.9% of the universe. But why listen to the experts, right? Instead you’ll in this case listen to those with no formal training in the subject of the matter that constitutes 99.9% of the universe.

So I don’t really believe you when you claim to honor the appropriate authorities on the subject. You only listen instead to those you want to hear, and their epicycles and Fairie Dust.

So would you agree then that in a universe 99.9% plasma, plasma physicists should be the authority?

 

[durangodawood]

It’s already been sorted out. I could show you the theory that already correctly predicted what we would find, but it’s not what you were taught to believe, and so you will reject it, even if both the sciences involved are themselves taught in those institutions of authority you believe in.

The differences being one predicted correctly what we would find, while the other got every single thing wrong. But you will reject those that got it right and only accept preaching from those that didn’t get anything right.

Worked out in time. It was worked out already by those using laboratory experiments with what constitutes 99.9% of the universe. But why listen to the experts, right? Instead you’ll in this case listen to those with no formal training in the subject of the matter that constitutes 99.9% of the universe.

So I don’t really believe you when you claim to honor the appropriate authorities on the subject. You only listen instead to those you want to hear, and their epicycles and Fairie Dust.

So would you agree then that in a universe 99.9% plasma, plasma physicists should be the authority?

Oh brother. How are you an authority on this?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Oh brother. How are you an authority on this?

Apparently I know more than those who couldn’t get a single prediction correct, since I accept the theory that did predict everything correctly. And apparently more than you since you are getting upset because you followed those that couldn’t get anything right.

But you avoided the question.

Wouldn’t the expert in a universe 99.9% plasma be a plasma physicist?

But I am no more an expert than any of you on here are, although from listening to you all, you would think you were one too. But you all never apply your own ad hominem attacks to yourself, just everyone else, right?

But I notice your also avoiding putting your experts beliefs of Star formation up against observations. Why is that, I mean they are experts, right, isn’t this the point of the discussion we are having? About those claimed institutions that train these experts? So if they did a good job, they should at least get something correct once in awhile shouldn’t they?

 

[durangodawood]

Apparently I know more than those who couldn’t get a single prediction correct, since I accept the theory that did predict everything correctly. And apparently more than you since you are getting upset because you followed those that couldn’t get anything right.

But you avoided the question.

Wouldn’t the expert in a universe 99.9% plasma be a plasma physicist?

But I am no more an expert than any of you on here are, although from listening to you all, you would think you were one too. But you all never apply your own ad hominem attacks to yourself, just everyone else, right?

No, I'm absolutely not an expert in the field, so I'm not going to be making extravagant claims on my own authority.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

No, I'm absolutely not an expert in the field, so I'm not going to be making extravagant claims on my own authority.

Well use your experts authority, we’ll see how their argument from authority stands up to the observations. That’s the point. I’m fixing to prove to you your claimed experts aren’t experts at all.

Anymore than you or I am....

 

[durangodawood]

Well use your experts authority, we’ll see how their argument from authority stands up to the observations. That’s the point. I’m fixing to prove to you your claimed experts aren’t experts at all.

Anymore than you or I am....

Did you perform these observations? Or are you taking them on authority?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Oh. You mean Ptolemy.

No, he means Potlomy. We've all been spelling his name wrong and justatruthseeker is here to correct us

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Did you perform these observations? Or are you taking them on authority?

Actually the very people who’s theory the observations proved wrong took them, those who’s authority you seem to accept while rejecting the authority of those who predicted correctly what we would find.

So are you implying that not only could they not predict things correctly, despite 200+ years of refining theory, but that they also can’t make correct observations as well?

Observations are observations. Regardless of who takes them, the telescope shows the same thing to every person. After the observation is when interpretation comes in, and they have already interpreted their theory to be incorrect by their own admissions.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

No, he means Potlomy. We've all been spelling his name wrong and justatruthseeker is here to correct us

If spelling is your biggest argument against the observational data then I have no worries at all. But since spelling is irrelevant to the subject matter, it’s just another invalid argument. At least you are all two for two in getting them into the right thread....

 

[durangodawood]

Actually the very people who’s theory the observations proved wrong took them, those who’s authority you seem to accept while rejecting the authority of those who predicted correctly what we would find.

So are you implying that not only could they not predict things correctly, despite 200+ years of refining theory, but that they also can’t make correct observations as well?

At this level in our discussion, its all he said /she said.... essentially argument from authority. Unless you propose to lay out the actual evidence yourself.

Thats all I've been saying. You reject argument from authority as a fallacy, yet youre happy to use it. You should use it! Expertise carries weight, imo.

 

[durangodawood]

No, he means Potlomy. We've all been spelling his name wrong and justatruthseeker is here to correct us

Teenage lobotomy.

 

[Skreeper]

Since the authorities have been wrong - Darwin believing the finches were reproductively isolated. 98% of the genome non-functional. Missing common ancestors at every single split, besides claims they would be found. E. coli remaining E. coli, just as every fossil remains the same.

Your authorities aren’t that much of an authority. Yah, they spent years telling us all about the coelacanth too. They spend quite a lot of time telling us things that years later don’t end up being true at all.

Not that you’d ever bother to go back and look at all the claims of fact that ended up being not fact, but fantasy.

“It is well known as a fallacy, though it is used in a cogent form when all sides of a discussion agree on the reliability of the authority in the given context.”

Based upon your experts track record over the years of always being wrong several years later, we don’t agree on the reliability of the authority in the given context.

Yea good luck with that dude. I think I reached the point where the entertainment value from conversing with you has been fully depleted so I'm gonna leave you to your ramblings.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

At this level in our discussion, its all he said /she said.... essentially argument from authority. Unless you propose to lay out the actual evidence yourself.

Thats all I've been saying. You reject argument from authority as a fallacy, yet youre happy to use it. You should use it! Expertise carries weight, imo.

Ahhh, but unless theory matches observation, then claims of expertise in and of itself carries no weight. I agree my expert’s testimony carries weight, but then they have made correct predictions and also have laboratory experiments backing them up. But had they not correctly predicted what we would find over 40 years ago, then their expertise would carry no weight either.

A theory must be able to make correct predictions before the observations. If those proposing the theory can’t do so, then their claims of expertise aren’t really worth the paper it’s printed on. And no, I don’t mean an error now and then. Every single observation since the space age has come as a surprise to mainstream astronomers and cosmologists. Not one or two, but every single one. They then slap in Fairie Dust to explain away their surprise. While on the other hand every observation that surprised them, has only confirmed the correct theory.

But as I said, you are really not interested in experts in the field relavent to the subject matter, but only those that believe as you do.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Yea good luck with that dude. I think I reached the point where the entertainment value from conversing with you has been fully depleted so I'm gonna leave you to your ramblings.

And yet you can’t show a single piece of evidence which goes against what I said. All you can do is make excuses in your own mind that allow you to ignore the evidence.

There is a name for that. It’s called Cognitive Dissonance. Look it up sometime.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Teenage lobotomy.

Older than you I’d wager.

Invalid Arguments

Except we now must make it three for three.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

If spelling is your biggest argument against the observational data then I have no worries at all.

It's not my biggest argument. You obviously missed the point of my post. You put yourself forward as the absolute authority on every subject. No matter what anyone else says, if you don't agree then it is the other poster who is wrong. So, if you write Potlomy but another poster writes Ptolemy then, since you're the absolute authority on everything, we must all be wrong and the correct spelling is Potlomy.

At least you are all two for two in getting them into the right thread....

What does that even mean?