Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- From: "Pete Dashwood" <dashwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:16:13 +1300
"Rick Smith" <ricksmith@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:13l3fsdh7v9t361@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Judson McClendon" <judmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:B0i4j.6679$k27.1089@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Alistair" <alistair@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:evidence.
"Judson McClendon" <ju...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"SkippyPB" <swieg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Oh yeah Judson. Pull that bag over your face and ignore the
You must be related to Seantor Inhofe.
I'm not ignoring the evidence, I'm just saying that, based on current
knowledge, it is not unequivocal,
And smoking tobacco doesn't cause cancer either, does it Judson?
Unlike global warming, tobacco was proven to cause cancer from actual
trials, not from vastly complex and disputed hypothesis.
Well, no! It has never be proven that smoking tobacco
causes cancer. In particular, it has never been shown
how the cancer develops, only that it does. Without
showing how the cancer develops, the claim that
"smoking causes lung cancer" is but another example
of the logical fallacy, "post hoc, ergo propter hoc".
The similarity between "smoking causes lung cancer"
and "global warming" seems to be that those who
believe there is overwhelming evidence that "X causes
Y" want X stopped without having to show how "X
causes Y".
In order to help me balance your argument, I have to ask: Do you smoke,
Rick?
Pete.
--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- From: Rick Smith
- Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- References:
- Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- From: SkippyPB
- Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- From: Judson McClendon
- Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- From: Alistair
- Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- From: Judson McClendon
- Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- From: Rick Smith
- Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- Prev by Date: Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- Next by Date: Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- Previous by thread: Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- Next by thread: Re: OT:Thanksgiving
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|