N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
But, just keep taking your ad hominem lessons from N_F. I'm sure they will take you far!
Why are you always using ad hominem to accuse me of ad hominem?
Because the first thing you do with something you disagree with is:
N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
Well gee, if a blog at the Huffington post says so, it must be true.
If the shoe fits . . .and I haven't used an Ad Hominem. I simply point to your use of them as a logical fallacy to avoid discussing the issue.
N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
Right back at ya then - it's that's kind of irrational nonsense that creates polls where global warming is the least important issue on the majority of the populations' list of things they care about. Fewer people are taking opinions like those of Huffington Post watermelon (green on the outside, red on the inside) warmist bloggers seriously.
No one said anything about Global Warming. That's something your own bias invented. The subject is how Canada's (and all the other listed countries) under funding Science will come back to bite us in the ass. But people who read the article, or the study linked in it before commenting, already knew that.
N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
Blogger opinion from the blogs section of a site known for its bias is not credible as news. That's fair comment.
Said the guy who used a Briebart opinion column as a story just yesterday.

And, we've been over this before too. A staff reporter who translates a scientific study into common language (from the original French) isn't a 'blogger'. And it is credible news. Ad Hominem #2.
Any other Ad Hominems to share?