Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

A-Ads

MN LiveCoach

Masternodes Live Coaching

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83474
  • *Latest: linpi

  • *Total Posts: 513258
  • *Total Topics: 15278
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 9
  • *Total: 11

Author Topic: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev  (Read 169209 times)

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #90 on: February 03, 2011, 05:31:59 PM »
No, you are the one, resorting to your own confused understanding of logic, who tries to justify fallacies. A logical argument cannot be constructed based on some random citation from the internet and pronouncing it as the be all and end all, as you're doing. I pointed that to you repeatedly but you fail to comprehend it. There's more to logic, especially in a scientific argument, than you're used to comprehend. Logic isn't some kind of a metaphysical pursuit with notions put in drawers for you to pull out and use. This is especially applicable to notions such as ad hominem, subject to subtleties way beyond your comprehension, obviously. So, yes, you lost that argument and hopefully you could learn something from it, namely, not to use mechanically definitions from random sites on the net. Learning by heart words such as 'red herring', 'argumentum ad nauseam' etc. and using them with the intention to appear more learned doesn't mean you understand their real meaning. You've heard bits and pieces about such 'elevated' words and have decided you can use them indiscriminately so that you can win arguments more easily. No you can't, as it became obvious. So, in my usual tone (I already explained why I do that) I have to tell you, restrain from cluttering threads with your gibberish because in this way you're destroying the discussions there in this way. Discussions can be destroyed not only by incompetent people, such as the one already mentioned, blabbering but in many other ways, including by know-it-all's such as you trying to appear learned but in fact only demonstrating their shallow thinking. 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #90 on: February 03, 2011, 05:31:59 PM »

Offline ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6567
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #91 on: February 03, 2011, 05:32:33 PM »
W,Quote,
you know that's a logical fallacy don't you? argumentum ad baculum or appeal to force or fear.
---------------------------
AHhh.True
Only works in close quarter arguements,and then only briefly!

But if we were all in the same room?somebody would try it! ;D [we need a toothless smiley guy]
Chetty

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #92 on: February 03, 2011, 05:35:49 PM »
No, you are the one, resorting to your own confused understanding of logic, who tries to justify fallacies. A logical argument cannot be constructed based on some random citation from the internet and pronouncing it as the be all and end all, as you're doing. I pointed that to you repeatedly but you fail to comprehend it. There's more to logic,especially in a scientific argument, than you're used to comprehend. Logic isn't some kind of a metaphysical pursuit with notions put in drawers for you to pull out and use. This is especially applicable to notions such as ad hominem, subject to subtleties way beyond your comprehension, obviously. So, yes, you lost that argument and hopefully you could learn something from it, namely, not to use mechanically definitions from random sites on the net. Learning by heart words such as 'red herring', 'ad nauseam' etc. and using them with the intention to appear more learned doesn't mean you understand their real meaning. You've heard bits and pieces about such 'elevated' words and have decided you can use them indiscriminately so that you can win arguments more easily. No you can't, as it became obvious. So, in my usual tone (I already explained why I do that) I have to tell you, restrain from cluttering threads with your gibberish because in this way you're destroying the discussions there in this way. Discussions can be destroyed not only by incompetent people, such as the one already mentioned, blabbering but in many other ways, including by know-it-all's such as you trying to appear learned but in fact only demonstrating their shallow thinking.

i'll repeat my request that you post "the real meaning of ad hominem" for us less enlightened ones since you conveniently omitted that from your reply... AGAIN, for the fourth time. ::) furthermore, if you think the definition the whole world adheres to is frivolous and expect us to adhere to the 'omni definition', you will need to define how and why the existing definition is incorrect... as well as actually providing us with your definition. ::)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #92 on: February 03, 2011, 05:35:49 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #93 on: February 03, 2011, 05:40:29 PM »
You're wrong. That is not a definition the whole world adheres to. The definition you cited came from a random site and you, not the whole world, chose to adhere to. As to what more there could be in ad hominem there was an explanation I already gave. Go back, read it again and get the answer to your question. Repeating the question over and over again doesn't mean I haven't already answered it.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #94 on: February 03, 2011, 05:50:18 PM »
You're wrong. That is not a definition the whole world adheres to. The definition you cited came from a random site and you, not the whole world, chose to adhere to. As to what more there could be in ad hominem there was an explanation I already gave. Go back, read it again and get the answer to your question. Repeating the question over and over again doesn't mean I haven't already answered it.
omni...  ::) the record shows i posted 4, that's FOUR links regarding the logical fallacy known as ad hominem. i even quoted the relevant part of the definition under EACH link to rebut your erroneous claim that all ad hominems are fallacious. if your lazy convenience requires it i will link you those posts... does your lazy convenience require it? apparently...

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html#hominem
"It's not always invalid to refer to the circumstances of an individual who is making a claim. If someone is a known perjurer or liar, that fact will reduce their credibility as a witness. It won't, however, prove that their testimony is false in this case. It also won't alter the soundness of any logical arguments they may make."

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html
"The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made). "

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/ad-hominem/
"It is important to note that the label “ad hominem” is ambiguous, and that not every kind of ad hominem argument is fallacious."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
"The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy,[2] but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.[3]"


furthermore, you have yet to post your definition... ::)
so, i'll repeat my request that you post "the real meaning of ad hominem" for us less enlightened ones since you conveniently omitted that from your reply... AGAIN, for the fifth time. ::) and finally, if you think the definition the whole world adheres to is frivolous and expect us to adhere to the 'omni definition', you will need to define how and why the existing definition is incorrect... as well as actually providing us with your definition... you have yet to do either, even after being asked for such repeatedly. ::)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #94 on: February 03, 2011, 05:50:18 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #95 on: February 03, 2011, 06:03:36 PM »
Posting links won't do. I told you that already. You need to think with your own head and not be lazily expecting ready answers in links. There are other lazy people in the world too. They copy from each other. That's an easy, although intellectually dishonest way to create websites. In fact that's cluttering the web (the web is cluttered with nonsense, OK, or you disagree with that too). I am telling you once again, you can't prove the veracity of a scientific thesis by just even quoting numerous standard texts, let alone links on the web. That doesn't cut the mustard as far as solid argumentation goes. Your argumentation is weak in trying get away with just citing links, understand that. And, again, don't make me repeat what I already said. Go back, read what I wrote regarding ad hominem and you'll get the answer to the question you're posing.

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #96 on: February 03, 2011, 06:09:46 PM »
Posting links won't do. I told you that already. You need to think with your own head and not be lazily expecting ready answers in links. There are other lazy people in the world too. They copy from each other. That's an easy, although intellectually dishonest way to create websites. In fact that's cluttering the web (the web is cluttered with nonsense, OK, or you disagree with that too). I am telling you once again, you can't prove the veracity of a scientific thesis by just even quoting numerous standard texts, let alone links on the web. That doesn't cut the mustard as far as solid argumentation goes. Your argumentation is weak in trying get away with just citing links, understand that. And, again, don't make me repeat what I already said. Go back, read what I wrote regarding ad hominem and you'll get the answer to the question you're posing.
LMFAO... omni, i have presented no argument, nor are we discussing a scientific thesis... i made a statement, calling out your error. that statement was thus: "incorrect, that would be a different logical fallacy. one known as a red herring... "

which was in response to  your post, which was thus:
Ad hominem attack is to start posting irrelevant links in response to criticism for incompetence.

now, please show us all what my "argument" was... define what the premise was and the conclusion. you don't even know what a logical argument is defined as... ::)

if you can manage that, which i highly doubt, please provide us with your definition of exactly what an ad hominem fallacy is. please provide all qualifications and exceptions.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #96 on: February 03, 2011, 06:09:46 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #97 on: February 03, 2011, 06:19:48 PM »
As a matter of fact the last discussion reveals one substantial flaw in the pursuit of OU -- the neglect of logic and deep thinking so pivotal in getting OU across to society. As I said earlier, the main thing to be understood for a successful winning the society over is the need to focus the discussion in more quantitative terms, into discussing numbered equations. All the enemies of OU, agents and zealous activists try to stay away from such quantitative discussions and always divert the talk into sociological, philosophical, ethical, aesthetical and what not types of discussions, all subject to interpretations. This is how they say the common person would understand it better. This is a very devious tactics used widely. That should be fought fiercely by those who care about OU research. We have other difficulties too, as the difficulty with the likes of Mikhail Dmitriev, Kapanadze and so on holding everybody hostage to their promises. Another difficulty comes from those putting forth ideas and waiting for others to actually manufacture the devices only to claim priority. The diversion towards interpretational discussions, however, is one of the most dangerous and destructive because it preys on the general misunderstanding of science fundamentals and thus can easily win popular support through manipulation. That's why it is so important to spend some time in exposing this devious tactics.

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #98 on: February 03, 2011, 06:28:24 PM »
As a matter of fact the last discussion reveals one substantial flaw in the pursuit of OU -- the neglect of logic and deep thinking so pivotal in getting OU across to society. As I said earlier, the main thing to be understood for a successful winning the society over is the need to focus the discussion in more quantitative terms, into discussing numbered equations. All the enemies of OU, agents and zealous activists try to stay away from such quantitative discussions and always divert the talk into sociological, philosophical, ethical, aesthetical and what not types of discussions, all subject to interpretations. This is how they say the common person would understand it better. This is a very devious tactics used widely. That should be fought fiercely by those who care about OU research. We have other difficulties too, as the difficulty with the likes of Mikhail Dmitriev, Kapanadze and so on holding everybody hostage to their promises. Another difficulty comes from those putting forth ideas and waiting for others to actually manufacture the devices only to claim priority. The diversion towards interpretational discussions, however, is one of the most dangerous and destructive because it preys on the general misunderstanding of science fundamentals and thus can easily win popular support through manipulation. That's why it is so important to spend some time in exposing this devious tactics.
i'll accept that as a tacit admission that you cannot provide a definition.

in conversing with you omni, i am constantly reminded of the saying "you can't use reason to argue somebody out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into"...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #98 on: February 03, 2011, 06:28:24 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #99 on: February 03, 2011, 06:36:30 PM »
One important destructive element in this respect is Karl Popper whose bogus philosophy of falsifying a theory has had substantial influence in some circles. Careful inspection of that "philosophy", using the said quantitative approach, reveals that the individual in question doesn't even care to check whether or not something he has pronounced as a theory (to subject it to his falsifiability criterion) qualifies as a theory in the first place. He doesn't even care whether or not his so-called theory can be the subject of his own criterion in order for it to be used further as a tool to explore the veracity of other theories.

Now, there are many people, just like our friend here, who pick that "theory" and metaphysically apply it as a tool without a second thought. That has incurred substantial harm to science, more than one can imagine, and is one of the reasons why science is in such shambles today. One really wonders, was that because of the sheer mediocrity of that person or that was a deliberate act of destruction so that intellectuals worldwide can be controlled more easily.

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #100 on: February 03, 2011, 06:44:58 PM »
One really wonders, was that because of the sheer mediocrity of that person or that was a deliberate act of destruction so that intellectuals worldwide can be controlled more easily.
more logical fallacy from the master... ::) this one is known as bifurcation or false dichotomy. this is committed when the arguer claims that his conclusion is one of only two options, when in fact there are other possibilities...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #100 on: February 03, 2011, 06:44:58 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #101 on: February 03, 2011, 06:47:37 PM »
In the case of Karl Popper, it is obvious that he didn't quite understand the theory he was subjecting to his falsifiability criterion, he relied on others to tell him that was really a theory, and just mindlessly went ahead and mechanically made pronouncements based on what he considers a criterion.

In a way we're meeting with a similar situation here reading our friend's rants here. That is an example of the damage the education based on phony gurus such as Karl Popper has done on some otherwise enthusiastic about science folks.

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #102 on: February 03, 2011, 06:49:45 PM »
more logical fallacy from the master... ::) this one is known as bifurcation or false dichotomy. this is committed when the arguer claims that his conclusion is one of only two options, when in fact there are other possibilities...

Well, I may stand corrected on that. I'm curious what more options there could be in addition to Karl Popper's mediocrity or deliberate conspiracy to destroy scientific thought (saying that it may be both seems redundant). That's a worthwhile discussion.

Offline MrMag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 757
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #103 on: February 03, 2011, 07:32:24 PM »
Omni

I am starting to question if you really understand what you have read when you cannot grasp the simple understanding of "the real meaning of ad hominem"

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev
« Reply #104 on: February 03, 2011, 07:34:06 PM »
Omni

I am starting to question if you really understand what you have read when you cannot grasp the simple understanding of "the real meaning of ad hominem"

Indeed, the meaning of ad hominem is simple, without the obfuscations of our friend.

 

OneLink