Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev

Started by hartiberlin, December 08, 2009, 01:45:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 ... 46
User actions

fletcher

#110
February 03, 2011, 02:50:23 PM
Reading this thread turned out to be a bad idea, especially the last half dozen pages - that's 20 minutes I'll never get back !

WilbyInebriated

#111
February 03, 2011, 02:53:14 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on February 03, 2011, 02:43:29 PM
Read carefully what you've posted and try to understand it. It is what I claim and not you: The personal attack must be aimed at undermining the claim and someone's expertise is not legitimately questioned. Otherwise it isn't ad hominem. All ad hominem attacks are fallacious. Mere personal attacks that don't aim at undermining the claim or are legitimately questioning the expertise of the oponent are not ad hominem. Is that so difficult to comprehend?

tu stultus es... q.e.d.

why do think some instances of ad hominem are allowed in court? because certain instances of ad hominem ARE NOT fallacious... they are however, still ad hominem. ::)

There is no news. There's the truth of the signal. What I see. And, there's the puppet theater...
the Parliament jesters foist on the somnambulant public.  - Mr. Universe

Omnibus

#112
February 03, 2011, 03:10:18 PM
That's ridiculous. We're not discussing court proceedings. Court proceedings have different rules than the rules during scientific discourse. In a scientific discourse the goal is the objective truth (as in the continental law which is not the law of the precedent in the states). In the states the objective truth has no meaning in court. All that matters there is the precedent and the opinions of the peers. Thus, all the law in the states is taylored to satisfy those requirements, not to seek the objective truth. You are totally confused. Never mix court proceedings in the states with scientific discourse. Never.

That mixup explains why your thinking is so muddled as far as logic goes.

Omnibus

#113
February 03, 2011, 03:12:03 PM
Quote from: fletcher on February 03, 2011, 02:50:23 PM
Reading this thread turned out to be a bad idea, especially the last half dozen pages - that's 20 minutes I'll never get back !

Don't blame me for that.

WilbyInebriated

#114
February 03, 2011, 03:14:27 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on February 03, 2011, 03:10:18 PM
That's ridiculous. We're not discussing court proceedings. Court proceedings have different rules than the rules during scientific discourse. In a scientific discourse the goal is the objective truth (as in the continental law which is not the law of the precedent in the states). In the states the objective truth has no meaning in court. All that matters there is the precedent and the opinions of the peers. Thus, all the law in the states is taylored to satisfy those requirements, not to seek the objective truth. You are totally confused. Never mix court proceedings in the states with scientific discourse. Never.

That mixup explains why your thinking is so muddled as far as logic goes.
you're ridiculous... there are no "different rules" in logic. ::) you are totally confused, you don't understand what a cogent argument is... a cogent argument is a cogent argument whether it be presented in scientific circles or judicial circles.

again, tu stultus es...  q.e.d
There is no news. There's the truth of the signal. What I see. And, there's the puppet theater...
the Parliament jesters foist on the somnambulant public.  - Mr. Universe
Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 ... 46
User actions