It would be cute if it wasn't so sad. No Mr. Shadow Fox, I was not employing an ad hominem fallacy. I am employing good old fashioned ridicule. There is a difference.
If you could understand the difference, you might also understand what a fallacy fallacy actually is.
Case in point:
You're an idiot. That is completely aside from the fact that you are also wrong, which I substantiated earlier.
This is not an ad hominem fallacy. You don't understand that, and you probably can't understand that.
Idiots can be accidentally right about things- so merely being an idiot doesn't guarantee that somebody is wrong. It makes it more probable, but is not proof in itself.
I didn't use that as proof, my first post completely debunks your claim, and continues to stand on its own. Your reply did not address my points, because you don't even understand what the conversation is about.
You are not capable of participating in a conversation with me at this point, because you literally
do not understand the first thing about logic.
In this case, you are wrong, plain and simple.
People who aren't idiots can also be wrong, they are just wrong far less often, and for far more respectable reasons. So merely being intelligent doesn't guarantee somebody is right either.
My original post, however, explains why I am right, and I don't feel the need to repeat myself.
Shadow Fox wrote:A fallacy fallacy IS a fallacy.
The problem is you don't understand what that means, what fallacies are, or how logic works.
I attempted to explain this in my earlier post, but you either chose not to understand it, are pretending not to understand it in order to play an idiot, or you're incapable of understanding it.
I also gave you a link which explains it in more detail, which you either didn't read or didn't understand (or are, again, pretending not to understand in order to troll).
In either case, I find it hilarious that you seem to think you can debate with me. That's a good one!
My first post is more than enough to stand on its own against any and all arguments you may make against it, now or in the future. You are wrong by definition, due to not understanding what words
Shadow Fox wrote:However, we must be the ones to debate this. Not someone else other than you.
You're wrong because you're wrong, and I have demonstrated clearly why that is, and provided a link for your further study.
However, I will not debate you because you're an idiot. That's not an ad hominem fallacy either, that's just, "I don't like to debate idiots".
You can run your mouth all you want, and pretend like I'm scared of you, and list off a bunch of fallacies you don't understand - whatever makes you feel better - but it's just going to turn you into more of a clown than you already are.
If you genuinely don't understand, and you ask politely
, I might try to explain it to you in a different way. But understand this: that would be a charity
on my part. By no means would we be having an equal exchange- at the very most, you could hope for an information session
with me as I school you on precisely why you are an idiot, so you can try not to be one in the future.
Now, you may proceed to shove your foot down your throat, if that's what you feel you need to do. Have fun with that.