Bong Lover said:
Hmmm, I didn't anticipate this to be so difficult to understand. Let me try to simplify. It doesn't matter what all kinds of evidence is saying. The point is that no matter if your conclusion turns out to be true or not, the argument you built to show it is invalid. What's more, it's been known to be invalid for over 2000 years. So, stop trying to think of this as you being right about which machine is stronger, the actual specs of the two machines is completely irrelevant to wether your argument is sound or not. Unfortunately, the case you built is logically invalid, and it will remain invalid for 10 000 years and beyond. That is my point. I want you, and everyone else on this site, to stop making arguments that are logically incorrect. |
My argument was correct. I formed a LOGICAL conclusion based on info we knew.
Think of it like this, gunshots are heard, neighbor calls the cops, dead wife is found, gun is found with fingerprints of the husband, husband is nowhere to be found. 1 + 1 = 2







