|
Post by wizer on Mar 10, 2008 10:45:18 GMT -5
As most of you know, there is a heated debate raging on another thread. The debate is far beyond the initial topic, which was whether or not a certain poster fabricated a certain story.
It is now into the realm of, "if you make an accusation that something is not true, PROVE it".
I am under the opinion that if something never happened, or does not exist, the burden is on the opposition, or those who believe it does it exist or did occur, to prove it.
For example, someone might say, "Santa Claus is real and I saw him delivering presents last Christmas morning"
Or.." I was abducted by a space alien and I was brainwashed".
I feel that I can call those people either liars or "self deceived" (meaning they actually believe it, even though it isn't true"), and I can do this without proving anything.
They can either 1) ignore me 2) provide proof of their statements or 3) admit that they were wrong, lied, or were fooled or self deceived but they cannot say that I am "wrong" in accusing them, because again, there is no way to prove a "negative", and the person making the statement is the one who must back up their statements.
I respectfully ask that those with low intelligence, who feel the need to attack the "person" and not the "argument", such as phyxius and J, refrain from posting on this thread, whereas I welcome intelligent posters such as Blazin, who, although wrong most of the time, does attempt to focus on the actual debate rather than taking cheap shots at a person as those who are clueless often tend to do.
Let's discuss....
|
|
|
Post by Phyxius on Mar 10, 2008 19:35:26 GMT -5
It's not a case of proving a negative. It is the same as prosecuting someone for fraud. You made an accusation of fraud. Back it up, or back the hell off...
|
|
|
Post by Chaos40 on Mar 10, 2008 21:00:15 GMT -5
It's not a case of proving a negative. It is the same as prosecuting someone for fraud. You made an accusation of fraud. Back it up, or back the hell off... Prixedust, I must say, .your stalking of IDoc is a bit disturbing
|
|
|
Post by wizer on Mar 10, 2008 21:01:50 GMT -5
It's not a case of proving a negative. It is the same as prosecuting someone for fraud. You made an accusation of fraud. Back it up, or back the hell off... Prixedust, I must say, .your stalking of IDoc is a bit disturbing At first it was a bit disconcerting, but after a while, I just don't notice him
|
|
|
Post by Phyxius on Mar 10, 2008 21:21:46 GMT -5
Prixedust, I must say, .your stalking of IDoc is a bit disturbing At first it was a bit disconcerting, but after a while, I just don't notice him Or the question, because it's just to inconvenient...
|
|
|
Post by lumpy on Mar 10, 2008 22:28:39 GMT -5
I feel that I can call those people either liars or "self deceived" (meaning they actually believe it, even though it isn't true"), and I can do this without proving anything. They can either 1) ignore me 2) provide proof of their statements or 3) admit that they were wrong, lied, or were fooled or self deceived but they cannot say that I am "wrong" in accusing them, because again, there is no way to prove a "negative", and the person making the statement is the one who must back up their statements. It's the Farking Internet. We can write pretty much whatever the hell we want without any fear of reprisal. For instance: I can claim that this is a photo of your diseased penis, which I bought off your Mom for a nickel. Was your Mom lying to me?
|
|
|
Post by wizer on Mar 10, 2008 22:36:55 GMT -5
I bet that feels better to a woman than a ribbed condom
|
|
|
Post by wizer on Mar 10, 2008 22:57:11 GMT -5
I don't know why I thought of a triceratops when I saw that pic
|
|
|
Post by ionysis on Mar 10, 2008 23:24:02 GMT -5
Can it not be compared to the premise of ":innocent until proven guilty"? Lady J's "crime" in Idocs accusation is fabrication of a story - lets say perjury. We, tyhe jury, have to assume she is innocent of this crime until Idoc (the prosecution) proves otherwise beyond reasonable doubt. P.S. Lumpy that is one of the most horrible things I have ever seen and definitely not what I needed to accompany my bowl of all-bran raisin flakes.
|
|
|
Post by sheyd on Mar 10, 2008 23:27:18 GMT -5
OMG Ionysis - I just about choked I laughed so hard - I had to show Harry, that was the funniest EVER! Bran flakes and that picture... someone needs to photoshop them side by side, just for comparison... LOL!
Shey
|
|
|
Post by lumpy on Mar 10, 2008 23:32:04 GMT -5
P.S. Lumpy that is one of the most horrible things I have ever seen and definitely not what I needed to accompany my bowl of all-bran raisin flakes. I apologize for that. I was just trying to prove a point. Just polished off a bowl of Raisin Bran myself.
|
|
|
Post by Phyxius on Mar 10, 2008 23:50:13 GMT -5
Mea culpa - I have to apologize 'cause Shey called me on it... I posted a nasty comment at wizer when I saw lumpy's pic. I misread and thought that wizer posted it. I apologize - I shouldn't have done that...
|
|
|
Post by sheyd on Mar 10, 2008 23:54:34 GMT -5
See - you boys can never say you have nothing in common! At the very least, I yell at you both! LOL!
Mama Shey
PS. Sorry, couldn't resist!
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Mar 11, 2008 10:50:52 GMT -5
lumpy, are you paying for the bleach my eyes need?
|
|
|
Post by murdock on Mar 11, 2008 10:54:23 GMT -5
I bet that feels better to a woman than a ribbed condom I wouldn't touch that thing with a ten foot pole... I think I just vomited in my mouth a little thinking about it
|
|