Quote:
Originally Posted by R Flair
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
What you said was 100% an ad hominem couched in a psychoanalysis of people who follow conspiracy theories.
Instead of responding to the topic discussion, you leveled an accusation against him concluding by way of implication that he "wasn't as smart as he thinks he is" among other things.
|
Yes that is correct, because it pushes me into defending myself personally, from my position, rather than the debate of the actual topic or accusations being true or false. I don't mind people taking snipes at me calling me out as just a conspiracy theorist or what have you, even a little name calling is fine (I deserve it sometimes), but that was a bombing run hehe... then came back to strafe, and still added completely nothing to the debate of the topic other than to try to derail it.
Is she is or is she aint? That's the matter at hand, the purpose of the thread, that and entertainment value. I'm fine with people defending her, if they defend her, preferably with some logical discussions outside of just some pure opinion on her with nothing else. Though at least that still has entertaining value if only just opinion, this aint formal debates after all.
But trying to lay waste to the topic by attacking 'conspiracy theorists' alone... or people that believe in conspiracies as the poster put it, is just a lame ad hominem derail attempt. Especially due to the fact that everyone has believed in some conspiracy theory and no one has believed in them all.