Dutch wrote:
> "ipse dixit" > wrote
>
>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote
>
>
>>>>>The only topic left to discus, Dreck, is your false
>>>>>belief that you have mastered logic
>>
>>I've always understood it.
>
>
> If you understand logic then explain the following BASIC BLUNDER.

He doesn't understand it, and all you'll get is some
additional meaningless repetition of some cut-and-paste
web page material that he didn't understand the first
time, and doesn't understand now. It's why he kept
defending the invalid Denying the Antecedent argument
of "veganism" as a valid argument for such a long time.
It's why he totally ****ed up validity and soundness
for such a long time.

>
> You presented the following as valid logic.
>
> 1) If I abstain from farmed animal products I cause less farmed animals to
> suffer and die.
> 2) I abstain from farmed animal products
> therefore
> 3) I cause less farmed animals to suffer and die
>
> X = I abstain from farmed animal products
> Y = I cause less farmed animals to suffer and die
>
> Your "logic" can be represented as
>
> 1) If X, therefore Y
> 2) X
> therefore
> 3) Y
>
> <???>
>
> A circular regurgitation of the original premiss, no logic involved. You
> have zero understanding of the basics of the topic you pose as an expert on.
> You are a poseur and a fool. You're also unpleasant, arrogant, a liar, and
> you probably smell like shit all the time.

You forgot chronically drunk, and an animal beater: he
practically broke the back of his dog from beating on
it with a broom handle.