And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
The obsession you two have with logical fallacies is weird. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how and when they matter. You use them incorrectly constantly. For gods sake, it’s a fallacy that using a fallacy makes you wrong. So what is the point?
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
The obsession you two have with logical fallacies is weird. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how and when they matter. You use them incorrectly constantly. For gods sake, it’s a fallacy that using a fallacy makes you wrong. So what is the point?
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
The obsession you two have with logical fallacies is weird. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how and when they matter. You use them incorrectly constantly. For gods sake, it’s a fallacy that using a fallacy makes you wrong. So what is the point?
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
Another ad hominem? So no argument.
You seem angry and quite frustrated with your inability to articulate a cohesive argument in a discussion.
Back to the video. Outside of attacking the source, do you have anything to say regarding the content?
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
The obsession you two have with logical fallacies is weird. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how and when they matter. You use them incorrectly constantly. For gods sake, it’s a fallacy that using a fallacy makes you wrong. So what is the point?
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
The obsession you two have with logical fallacies is weird. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how and when they matter. You use them incorrectly constantly. For gods sake, it’s a fallacy that using a fallacy makes you wrong. So what is the point?
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
Another ad hominem? So no argument.
You seem angry and quite frustrated with your inability to articulate a cohesive argument in a discussion.
Back to the video. Outside of attacking the source, do you have anything to say regarding the content?
You’re incoherent. It’s not possible to have a cohesive argument with someone that spams logical fallacies they don’t understand.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
The obsession you two have with logical fallacies is weird. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how and when they matter. You use them incorrectly constantly. For gods sake, it’s a fallacy that using a fallacy makes you wrong. So what is the point?
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
Another ad hominem? So no argument.
You seem angry and quite frustrated with your inability to articulate a cohesive argument in a discussion.
Back to the video. Outside of attacking the source, do you have anything to say regarding the content?
You’re incoherent. It’s not possible to have a cohesive argument with someone that spams logical fallacies they don’t understand.
Ok. I’ll type slowly so you can follow along. Do. You. Have. An. Argument. Regarding. The. Specific. Content. Of. The. Video. That. Doesn’t. Involve. Hysterics. About. Who. Created. The. Video?
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
The obsession you two have with logical fallacies is weird. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how and when they matter. You use them incorrectly constantly. For gods sake, it’s a fallacy that using a fallacy makes you wrong. So what is the point?
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
Another ad hominem? So no argument.
You seem angry and quite frustrated with your inability to articulate a cohesive argument in a discussion.
Back to the video. Outside of attacking the source, do you have anything to say regarding the content?
You’re incoherent. It’s not possible to have a cohesive argument with someone that spams logical fallacies they don’t understand.
Ok. I’ll type slowly so you can follow along. Do. You. Have. An. Argument. Regarding. The. Specific. Content. Of. The. Video. That. Doesn’t. Involve. Hysterics. About. Who. Created. The. Video?
I’ll try and speak your language by incorrectly accusing you of fallacies.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
The obsession you two have with logical fallacies is weird. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how and when they matter. You use them incorrectly constantly. For gods sake, it’s a fallacy that using a fallacy makes you wrong. So what is the point?
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
Another ad hominem? So no argument.
You seem angry and quite frustrated with your inability to articulate a cohesive argument in a discussion.
Back to the video. Outside of attacking the source, do you have anything to say regarding the content?
You’re incoherent. It’s not possible to have a cohesive argument with someone that spams logical fallacies they don’t understand.
Ok. I’ll type slowly so you can follow along. Do. You. Have. An. Argument. Regarding. The. Specific. Content. Of. The. Video. That. Doesn’t. Involve. Hysterics. About. Who. Created. The. Video?
I’ll try and speak your language by incorrectly accusing you of fallacies.
Argument from repetition.
So nothing on the content of the video. Good to know. But but but KOCHS!!!!!
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
The obsession you two have with logical fallacies is weird. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how and when they matter. You use them incorrectly constantly. For gods sake, it’s a fallacy that using a fallacy makes you wrong. So what is the point?
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
Another ad hominem? So no argument.
You seem angry and quite frustrated with your inability to articulate a cohesive argument in a discussion.
Back to the video. Outside of attacking the source, do you have anything to say regarding the content?
You’re incoherent. It’s not possible to have a cohesive argument with someone that spams logical fallacies they don’t understand.
Ok. I’ll type slowly so you can follow along. Do. You. Have. An. Argument. Regarding. The. Specific. Content. Of. The. Video. That. Doesn’t. Involve. Hysterics. About. Who. Created. The. Video?
I’ll try and speak your language by incorrectly accusing you of fallacies.
Argument from repetition.
So nothing on the content of the video. Good to know. But but but KOCHS!!!!!
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
The obsession you two have with logical fallacies is weird. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how and when they matter. You use them incorrectly constantly. For gods sake, it’s a fallacy that using a fallacy makes you wrong. So what is the point?
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
Another ad hominem? So no argument.
You seem angry and quite frustrated with your inability to articulate a cohesive argument in a discussion.
Back to the video. Outside of attacking the source, do you have anything to say regarding the content?
You’re incoherent. It’s not possible to have a cohesive argument with someone that spams logical fallacies they don’t understand.
Ok. I’ll type slowly so you can follow along. Do. You. Have. An. Argument. Regarding. The. Specific. Content. Of. The. Video. That. Doesn’t. Involve. Hysterics. About. Who. Created. The. Video?
I’ll try and speak your language by incorrectly accusing you of fallacies.
Argument from repetition.
So nothing on the content of the video. Good to know. But but but KOCHS!!!!!
Slippery slope.
Nothing on the video. That’s what I thought. You seem frustrated.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
The obsession you two have with logical fallacies is weird. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how and when they matter. You use them incorrectly constantly. For gods sake, it’s a fallacy that using a fallacy makes you wrong. So what is the point?
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
You're really struggling.
Hondo level struggle.
It's sad to see how far APAG has fallen.
Maybe he was different here before my time but since I've been here the guy hasn't "fallen" anywhere. He has always been this way.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
And if you think the $6000 donated by the Charles Koch Foundation is meaningless, don’t worry, the Koch’s also fund Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust.
Comments
Your insecurities about your intelligence are your own problem. Stop pushing your Wikipedia level knowledge of fallacies to try to prove something to strangers on the internet.
Hondo level struggle.
It's sad to see how far APAG has fallen.
You seem angry and quite frustrated with your inability to articulate a cohesive argument in a discussion.
Back to the video. Outside of attacking the source, do you have anything to say regarding the content?
Argument from repetition.
Bullshit.
Nothings changed with us.