Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackscendence
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
And that's the difference, which hasbinbad originally pointed out, between Logic and Empiricism.
We know that FE had no reason to do this to themselves, and little opportunity to. We know the facts of the encounter (shroom room, etc) and we know that TMO wiped first. We know that TMO had little chance to compete with a full wipe and we know that FE had no reason to rush the encounter with TMO looking at a 15-20 minute recovery.
THIS is called rational thinking.
Yours is an Arguement from Ignorance.
Is that one on the list of fallacies you keep alt-tabbing over to, alarti?
You'd make a great preacher but a real shitty murder investigator.
|
You don't know the facts actually. You assume the facts. That is the issue. Who said Trak was going to Shroom room.... you did. I see no evidence that he did that. he could have gone to the Jugg tunnels, and the second time he definitely ran straight to ledge.
You assume facts based on opinion without evidence. I know opinion based journalism is popular, fun and exciting, but its not proof/evidence/ or proper use of logic.
Thanks for looking up a logical fallacy and incorrectly trying to apply it however, I like when you try!
Here is some proper use. Merrk/Mortiiss entire case is an appeal to probability it is fallacious and illogical.
What I have said from the beginning is there is simply not enough evidence to prove any case here...there are too many possibilities/variables to draw any rational conclusion.