Progressive Twitch streamer Hasan Piker filed a defamation lawsuit against conservative CNN commentator Scott Jennings on Tuesday, accusing him of falsely claiming Piker advocated for lynching Blac…
That’s not what an ad hominem is, dumb-dumb, take a Latin or Logic class. Please quote to me where you think I did an ad hominem and then provide a definition for it so I can laugh in your fucking face about another thing you don’t know. You are doing a fallacy where you think my calling you a dumb idiot liar somehow negates all the points I brought up because your babybrain can’t handle numbers higher than two, and somehow I can roast the shit out of you while simultaneously negating your points. The best you can get is that I said only fucking morons would believe the stupid shit you say, but even that fails to capture that I explained why it was stupid dumbass fucking bullshit lies that you managed to regurgitate from your master.
It’s just loser behavior over and over again because you simply repeated everything with nothing additional. Anyway, hope you get that Israel money or whatever you’re in this for because you keep trying to high road lies like a foreign agent. Let me know when you have a fourth (wow, big number alert!) piece of evidence so I can take your argument seriously.
These are all “Abusive ad hominem / name-calling” because they target my intelligence, character and credibility rather than my claims.
“Let me know when you have a fourth … piece of evidence so I can take your argument seriously”; “you keep trying to high road lies”
Here you’re “Poisoning The Well” by trying to discredit any future claims or arguments I might bring.
“hope you get that Israel money or whatever you’re in this for”; “like a foreign agent”
Here you’re applying a “Circumstantial Ad Hominem” by bringing in something irrelevant to the discussion, and sprinkling it with some “Bare Assertion Fallacy” given that you’ve given no basis for assuming that I’m allied with Israel or any other foreign power.
regurgitate … from your master”; “Israel money”; “foreign agent”
Here you’re imploying the “Guilt by Association / Bias And Hominem” fallacy by discredit anything I say based on the same previous “Bare Assertion Fallacy”.
You are doing a fallacy where you think my calling you a dumb idiot liar somehow negates all the points…”
Here you’re abusing the “Tu Quoque / Appeal To Hypocrisy” fallacy by trying to claim that I do not understand the fallacies I mentioned, rather than engage with the actual points.
It’s also fallacious because my appeal to toning down the personal attacks on your comments came after I responded to your actual points.
You also employed a few other non-ad hominem fallacies:
a Straw man, an Appeal to Ridicule, A Red Herring / Irrelevant Conclusion as well as general Bullying / Intimidation (which is rhetorical and not strictly logical).
That’s not what an ad hominem is, dumb-dumb, take a Latin or Logic class. Please quote to me where you think I did an ad hominem and then provide a definition for it so I can laugh in your fucking face about another thing you don’t know. You are doing a fallacy where you think my calling you a dumb idiot liar somehow negates all the points I brought up because your babybrain can’t handle numbers higher than two, and somehow I can roast the shit out of you while simultaneously negating your points. The best you can get is that I said only fucking morons would believe the stupid shit you say, but even that fails to capture that I explained why it was stupid dumbass fucking bullshit lies that you managed to regurgitate from your master.
It’s just loser behavior over and over again because you simply repeated everything with nothing additional. Anyway, hope you get that Israel money or whatever you’re in this for because you keep trying to high road lies like a foreign agent. Let me know when you have a fourth (wow, big number alert!) piece of evidence so I can take your argument seriously.
No problem:
First of; here’s where I primarily source my definitions from, just so you can read along. But you can find similar wording elsewhere.
Now, quoting just your latest reply where you deny using ad hominems-
These are all “Abusive ad hominem / name-calling” because they target my intelligence, character and credibility rather than my claims.
Here you’re “Poisoning The Well” by trying to discredit any future claims or arguments I might bring.
Here you’re applying a “Circumstantial Ad Hominem” by bringing in something irrelevant to the discussion, and sprinkling it with some “Bare Assertion Fallacy” given that you’ve given no basis for assuming that I’m allied with Israel or any other foreign power.
Here you’re imploying the “Guilt by Association / Bias And Hominem” fallacy by discredit anything I say based on the same previous “Bare Assertion Fallacy”.
Here you’re abusing the “Tu Quoque / Appeal To Hypocrisy” fallacy by trying to claim that I do not understand the fallacies I mentioned, rather than engage with the actual points. It’s also fallacious because my appeal to toning down the personal attacks on your comments came after I responded to your actual points.
You also employed a few other non-ad hominem fallacies: a Straw man, an Appeal to Ridicule, A Red Herring / Irrelevant Conclusion as well as general Bullying / Intimidation (which is rhetorical and not strictly logical).
And that was just in this last message.