Farmer sees group of 5 Bigfoot in his orchard

(May 6, 2018 12:35 AM)Magical Realist Wrote:

(May 5, 2018 11:40 PM)Syne Wrote:

(May 5, 2018 08:42 PM)Magical Realist Wrote:

(May 5, 2018 06:07 PM)Syne Wrote: Consensus fallacy.

Only about 30% of Americans actually believe in Bigfoot. So no...not consensus fallacy.

LOL! A consensus fallacy is "if many believe, it is so", not if a majority, or even plurality, believe.
Again, learn the words before you attempt to use them yourself.  

I didn't even appeal to many believers in Bigfoot. So again, no consensus fallacy here.

Really?

(May 5, 2018 04:50 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: There's just too many eyewitness reports, too many videos and photos, and too many footprint casts not to reach that conclusion.

So "too many" isn't "many"?

Quote:So "too many" isn't "many"?

I'm talking about evidence, not the people who believe in Bigfoot. Consensus fallacy involves a belief and many believing it. I never mentioned that at all. Just the abundance of evidence for Bigfoot's existence.

(May 6, 2018 02:04 AM)Magical Realist Wrote:

Quote:So "too many" isn't "many"?

I'm talking about evidence, not the people who believe in Bigfoot. Consensus fallacy involves a belief and many believing it. I never mentioned that at all. Just the abundance of evidence for Bigfoot's existence.

You're talking about evidence only as interpreted by bigfoot believers. And you can't deny that since you've spent so much time berating any other interpretations.
Hence a bandwagon fallacy. You've painted yourself into a corner.

Quote:You're talking about evidence only as interpreted by bigfoot believers.

Nope..talking about real evidence. Eyewitness accounts, and videos and photos, and footprints. Same evidence we solve crimes with. There is no matter of "interpretation" about it. It is real evidence. And it has nothing to do with a bandwagon fallacy. I never mentioned people's beliefs. Give up yet?

(May 6, 2018 02:50 AM)Magical Realist Wrote:

Quote:You're talking about evidence only as interpreted by bigfoot believers.

Nope..talking about real evidence. Eyewitness accounts, and videos and photos, and footprints. Same evidence we solve crimes with. There is no matter of "interpretation" about it. It is real evidence. And it has nothing to do with a bandwagon fallacy. I never mentioned people's beliefs. Give up yet?

No, since none of that "evidence" can be independently substantiated by others, it is presented by believers as belief.
Crimes require habeas corpus (that you have the body) and identification of the individual perpetrator.
None of your "evidence" can provide a body nor an individual associated with said "evidence".
It's like having fingerprints, footprints, video, and photos with no one to match them to. It's all useless and unverifiable.
There is always room for interpretation until you can produce a foot to match to footprint, a face to match to photo, etc.. That is the kind of evidence that solves crimes.
Anything in the real world is real evidence. That is a completely trivial claim that no one refutes. The belief is what said evidence supposedly indicates without any ability to match effect to cause.
You don't have to explicitly mention belief to be making an argument ad populum. You only have to be relying on belief, which you are. You just can't admit it to yourself, because that's how blind faith works.

Quote:None of your "evidence" can provide a body nor an individual associated with said "evidence".
It's like having fingerprints, footprints, video, and photos with no one to match them to. It's all useless and unverifiable.

Nope...all compelling verfification of the identity of a large hairy bipedal hominid living in the woods of North America. It's sufficient to send a man to prison. It's sufficient for proving the existence of Bigfoot. And again, I made no mention of many believing anything so it isn't argument ad populum and never will be. Try again?

(May 6, 2018 07:04 AM)Magical Realist Wrote:

Quote:None of your "evidence" can provide a body nor an individual associated with said "evidence".
It's like having fingerprints, footprints, video, and photos with no one to match them to. It's all useless and unverifiable.

Nope...all compelling verfification of the identity of a large hairy bipedal hominid living in the woods of North America. It's sufficient to send a man to prison. It's sufficient for proving the existence of Bigfoot. And again, I made no mention of many believing anything so it isn't argument ad populum and never will be. Try again?

No, just your complete ignorance of what constitutes a verified evidence. Notice how you completely fail to refute anything in what you quoted.
You cannot send a man to prison unless you can find the man that matches the prints, photos, videos, etc. that link him to a crime.
Since you cannot produce the individual, you cannot ascertain its identity.

"a large hairy bipedal hominid living in the woods of North America" is the belief you have cited many times, from "too many" people. You cannot demonstrate it to be so, thus it can only be belief.
Let us know if your blind faith and confirmation bias ever allow you to make contact with reality.

(May 6, 2018 07:16 AM)Syne Wrote:

(May 6, 2018 07:04 AM)Magical Realist Wrote:

Quote:None of your "evidence" can provide a body nor an individual associated with said "evidence".
It's like having fingerprints, footprints, video, and photos with no one to match them to. It's all useless and unverifiable.

Nope...all compelling verfification of the identity of a large hairy bipedal hominid living in the woods of North America. It's sufficient to send a man to prison. It's sufficient for proving the existence of Bigfoot. And again, I made no mention of many believing anything so it isn't argument ad populum and never will be. Try again?

No, just your complete ignorance of what constitutes a verified evidence. Notice how you completely fail to refute anything in what you quoted.
You cannot send a man to prison unless you can find the man that matches the prints, photos, videos, etc. that link him to a crime.
Since you cannot produce the individual, you cannot ascertain its identity.

"a large hairy bipedal hominid living in the woods of North America" is the belief you have cited many times, from "too many" people. You cannot demonstrate it to be so, thus it can only be belief.
Let us know if your blind faith and confirmation bias ever allow you to make contact with reality.  

Sorry, but like I said the evidence speaks for itself, just as it does in solving a crime. Everything proves the existence of Bigfoot. There is no interpretation about it. And you bitching about it doesn't change a thing. Try again? Or are you going to try to defend that consensus fallacy accusation again? lol!

(May 6, 2018 07:49 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: Sorry, but like I said the evidence speaks for itself, just as it does in solving a crime. Everything proves the existence of Bigfoot. There is no interpretation about it. And you bitching about it doesn't change a thing. Try again? Or are you going to try to defend that consensus fallacy accusation again? lol!

Thanks again for your unerring resolve to make sure everyone understands the depths of your ignorance.
You apparently think you could solve a crime without any hard evidence of a crime and no way to find the criminal.
"Everything proves the existence of Bigfoot" and "There is no interpretation about it" are absolute, dogmatic statements.

Your belief is transparent to everyone.

Quote:Thanks again for your unerring resolve to make sure everyone understands the depths of your ignorance.

Yep..here we are at the ad homs again. Don't waste my time anymore..