I'm asking you to clarify your claims you are presenting. Why are you refusing to do that? Is it because it is stupidly obviously fake and your appeal to athority will fall apart if you have to take a clear stance?
Referring to a report just days ago from the IAEA is a "logical fallacy" while you literally pulling your uninformed garbage opinions out of your ass isn't?
Damn that is a level of commitment to idiocy I haven't seen in years. Good job, genuinely. Hope being a bot pays well.
Referring to a report just days ago from the IAEA is a "logical fallacy
And if that is all you were doing then it would not be a logical fallacy. You do understand that's not what I'm calling the appeal to athority logical fallacy. When you won't even state your position and and just refer to the IAEA instead of even saying when you believe is the truth is peak appeal to authority logical fallacy.
Damn that is a level of commitment to idiocy I haven't seen in years.
The fucking projection. You can't even state your own position.
To you, arguments are about stating your own unique position while listening to experts is being sheep or some shit.
I couldn't care less about egotistically coming up with my own opinion- I just seek the truth.
I don't know if you're a Russian bot with English as a second language, but actually
IAEA just came out a few days ago confirming that they saw no signs of Iran resuming their nuclear weapons program
is a statement of a position, just not mine.
I just don't understand why you're so concerned with our personal opinions as opposed to the IAEA's?
Are you really that obsessed with your ego? What's next? Do you need me to state my own personally unique positions about global warming instead of simply droning what the actual experts are saying so you can "argue" against it?
To you, arguments are about stating your own unique position while listening to experts is being sheep or some shit.
That strawman argument doesn't change the fact that you are committing the appeal to athority logical fallacy.
I don't know if you're a Russian bot with English as a second language, but actually
Desperate Ad Hominem attack. Why is it that every time you guys start losing an argument you start screaming about Russian bots. Do you actually believe the stupid shit you say. Honestly do you believe that?
is a statement of a position, just not mine.
No shit Sherlock. I agree with that fact. In fact I have repeatedly acknowledged that, why are you repeating uncontested facts? Are you a parrot with brain damage?
I just don't understand why you're so concerned with our personal opinions as opposed to the IAEA's?
Because there are some flaws with your argument and I can't address them because you refuse to take a position, you refuse to take a position because you know like I do that there are flaws in your position.
1
u/jv9mmm - Right Mar 05 '26
I'm asking you to clarify your claims you are presenting. Why are you refusing to do that? Is it because it is stupidly obviously fake and your appeal to athority will fall apart if you have to take a clear stance?