Reminds me of capitalists when they "debate".
i am also fast losing interest in this conversation. There is actually no good dialogue coming from his side. It's like trying to explain rocket science to a child.
I am finding Nathaniel extremely dishonest. Maybe that's just who he is, but since I am not his god...I am not responsible for him. I doubt anyone here is.
“A subtle form of trolling involving “bad-faith” questions. You disingenuously frame your conversation as a sincere request to be enlightened, placing the burden of educating you entirely on the other party. If your bait is successful, the other party may engage, painstakingly laying out their logic and evidence in the false hope of helping someone learn. In fact you are attempting to harass or waste the time of the other party, and have no intention of truly entertaining their point of view.”
Oh wow. I never heard about this kind of trolling!
To be honest...I've seen it MANY times and I never realised it was a common form of wasting people's time and discussion space.
That comic is healrious!
FYI - some more on the topic here.
Reg, your link here links to another article which has a very interesting quote
When the target is continually asked questions - especially the same question under a different phrasing, which is very common when sealioning - it's rattling. They have to fight the natural instinct to respond in good faith to neutrally-phrased questions, as answering them will only bring more.
Remind you of someone?
I think sealioning, tone-policing and concern-trolling ought to be added to the list of notable fallacies (especially sea-lioning). They aren't fallacies per-se but discussion disruption...which contain numerous midly-fallicious statements but when aggregated sway some opinion towards doubt on a topic where doubt isn't warranted which is as poisonous to rational debate as any inductive or deductive falllacy. It seems teaching critical thinking skills to school children is ever more important with their lives intimately connected to social media from a very young age.
if thats your whole argument, i read a 321 page book yesterday.
dosent make my evidence false
Wait a minute, did you present evidence...of God?! Quick, upload it to YouTube, the fate of Humanity depends upon it!
Its your use of bad evidence that makes your evidence false. An ignorant person who has barely read reliable sources on a tópic will usually get a point por two right but predictably fails on the rest of it. Instead of repeating bad arguments you can use the opportunity of learning something here (a few users are experts in some topics).
want to give me an example?