Ban this!

[DanieltheDragon]

modern anachronistic projection

I vote to ban this phrase! Mainly because I don't like thinking the word anachronistic in my head every time I read it. Them red coats must be up to something.....

[bluethread]

This is just an example of black whitewashing or adult childhood regression, which are the result of the insufficient overfunding of the Department of redundancy department. I suggest immediate action be taken to aggressively ignore this sublime travesty sometime in the near future.

[Danmark]

modern anachronistic projection

I vote to ban this phrase!

I vote to ban the phrase, "anecdotal proof." [sigh]

See: http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 929#734929

chevron1:

not every debate requires the submission of formal proof. anecdotal proof is adequate. why not just accept anecdotal proof for now for the sake of argument?

is not the question of whether god exists based on anecdotal proof?

[bluethread]

modern anachronistic projection

I vote to ban this phrase!

I vote to ban the phrase, "anecdotal proof." [sigh]

See: http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 929#734929

chevron1:

not every debate requires the submission of formal proof. anecdotal proof is adequate. why not just accept anecdotal proof for now for the sake of argument?

is not the question of whether god exists based on anecdotal proof?

Well, that limits the definition to scientific or logical conclusion. I see where that would be preferable to the scientific rationalist. However, one need only acknowledge ones philosophical preference and say that one rejects it on scientific or logical grounds. The other alternative is to just ban the word "proof" altogether and allow the conclusions to speak for themselves. It is my experience that word "proof" is used more often as an attempt to shut down discussion, than to foster it.

[Danmark]

modern anachronistic projection

I vote to ban this phrase!

I vote to ban the phrase, "anecdotal proof." [sigh]

See: http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 929#734929

chevron1:

not every debate requires the submission of formal proof. anecdotal proof is adequate. why not just accept anecdotal proof for now for the sake of argument?

is not the question of whether god exists based on anecdotal proof?

Well, that limits the definition to scientific or logical conclusion. I see where that would be preferable to the scientific rationalist. However, one need only acknowledge ones philosophical preference and say that one rejects it on scientific or logical grounds. The other alternative is to just ban the word "proof" altogether and allow the conclusions to speak for themselves. It is my experience that word "proof" is used more often as an attempt to shut down discussion, than to foster it.

"anecdotal evidence" is problematic as a contradiction in terms, but "anecdotal proof" is hilarious.

[DanieltheDragon]

This is just an example of black whitewashing or adult childhood regression, which are the result of the insufficient overfunding of the Department of redundancy department. I suggest immediate action be taken to aggressively ignore this sublime travesty sometime in the near future.

Words cannot express the letters for which they represent to the repulsive beauty found withheld in this response.