Logic, Deductive reasoning, and the burden of proof

[DrProof]

After all that, you still said nothing. For a successful prosecution you need key points, for example motive, DNA, being at the scene during the crime, and more evidence to deny the would be and circumstances that happen. Secondly the jury is there for a non bias appraisal of said evidence, and something with constitution on jury of your peers. Thirdly falsely accused victims are often sent to jail because of A: lack of evidence or B: speedy trial. For example, many accused rapists (who may very well fit this 'suspect' category) were indeed prosecuted and sent off to prison. And what exonerated them? DNA evidence some years later. They were railroaded through the system because the evidence was not concrete, it was based on belief.

Inb4 this turns into a The Judicial System is corrupt thread.

 

[V h o]

Inb4 this turns into a The Judicial System is corrupt thread.

Judicial system isn't exempt from corruption lel

 

[Dantee]

It's not that difficult to understand. Proof or evidence >deductive reasoning . My thread actually had both proof that led to my deductive conlusion. Some people just aren't as literate to understand something so simple.

 

[ComplexCity]

It's not that difficult to understand. Proof = evidence. My thread actually had both proof that led to my conclusion. Some people just aren't as literate to understand something so simple.

Logical debaters will disagree

 

[Dantee]

Logical debaters will disagree

oh the irony.

 

[ComplexCity]

oh the irony.

Indeed the irony is strong in your fallacious statement

 

[Dantee]

Indeed the irony is strong in your fallacious statement

no need to be rustled when you don't understand something.

 

[ComplexCity]

no need to be rustled when you don't understand something.

Lol I'm not the one who went to the mods and snitched for making a Dantee quality thread.

 

[Dantee]

Lol I'm not the one who went to the mods and snitched for making a Santee quality thread.

I'm not the one quoting every single thing you say because it makes me sad. : ) You never post a legit argument ever. de-rail subject de-rail subject. Do you know what proof is?

 

[ComplexCity]

I'm not the one quoting every single thing you say because it makes me sad. : ) You never post a legit argument ever. de-rail subject de-rail subject. Do you know what proof is?

You sound rustled
I see you've still to refute either of my oh flawless threads. I'll be waiting for your rebuttal in them if you so choose:flakez:

 

[Dantee]

You sound rustled
I see you've still to refute either of my oh flawless threads. I'll be waiting for your rebuttal in them if you so choose:flakez:

I'll be waiting for your rebuttal here. As you were Kubouu, stay rustled my #1 hater.

 

[ComplexCity]

stay rustled my #1 hater.

In order for me to hate, there has to be something for me to hate on. According to my calculations, you have nothing for me to hate on you about :flakez:

I'll be waiting for your rebuttal here.

My sig indicates that others aren't as literate as you to understand your fallacious fanfic. It seems that the irony in my sigs rest sure on your inability to well, comprehend anything really. Let's take a look at the Merriam dictionary

re·but·tedre·but·ting
Full Definition of REBUT

transitive verb
1
: to drive or beat back : repel
2
a : to contradict or oppose by formal legal argument, plea, or countervailing proof
b : to expose the falsity of : refute.

In order for me to have a rebuttal, a statement has to be made by you that calls for rebutting but simply put, you've made no statement in order do me to do so. Why not crack open a dictionary before you use words to big for your vocabulary :sdo:

 

[Dantee]

In order for me to hate, there has to be something for me to hate on. According to my calculations, you have nothing for me to hate on you about :flakez:



My sig indicates that others aren't as literate as you to understand your fallacious fanfic. It seems that the irony in my sigs rest sure on your inability to well, comprehend anything really. Let's take a look at the Merriam dictionary




In order for me to have a rebuttal, a statement has to be made by you that calls for rebutting but simply put, you've made no statement in order do me to do so. Why not crack open a dictionary before you use words to big for your vocabulary :sdo:

I'm glad you learned how to use google to look up the dictionary maybe you can actually make a rebuttal now for what I posted instead of de-railing the topic yet again. Do i make you that angry sir?

It's not that difficult to understand. Proof or evidence >deductive reasoning . My thread actually had both proof that led to my deductive conlusion. Some people just aren't as literate to understand something so simple.

I'm not the one quoting every single thing you say because it makes me sad. : ) You never post a legit argument ever. de-rail subject de-rail subject. Do you know what proof is?

 

[ComplexCity]

I'm glad you learned how to use google to look up the dictionary maybe you can actually make a rebuttal now for what I posted instead of de-railing the topic yet again. Do i make you that angry sir?

It's for you kind sir, I know what a "proper rebuttal" is. According to logical members on the base, you don't. You're asking a question that has already been answered in the OP. Like I said, learn your vocabulary before using words you don't understand

 

[Dantee]

It's for you kind sir, I know what a "proper rebuttal" is. According to logical members on the base, you don't. You're asking a question that has already been answered in the OP. Like I said, learn your vocabulary before using words you don't understand

According to the "logical members on the base"? who might they be Why are you bothering to quote, reply and sig me if you can't even a have a proper discussion. Once again proving my point. Quit being so angry about what I did to you. At least stick to the topic. We are discussing the burden of proof if you actually read the OP

 

[ComplexCity]

I see your jimmes are still rustled after getting solo'ed by Drizzy :lol

According to the "logical members on the base"? who might they be Why are you bothering to quote, reply and sig me if you can't even a have a proper discussion. Once again proving my point. Quit being so angry about what I did to you. At least stick to the topic. We are discussing the burden of proof if you actually read the OP

It's not that difficult to understand. Proof = evidence. My thread actually had both proof that led to my conclusion. Some people just aren't as literate to understand something so simple.

Logical debaters will disagree

I fail to see where I strayed off topic. I literally replied to your post within the context of the thread. Oh right I forgot, I'm to illiterate to understand "Oh So Flawless" logic :sdo:

 

[Dantee]

I see your jimmes are still rustled after getting solo'ed by Drizzy :lol









I fail to see where I strayed off topic. I literally replied to your post within the context of the thread. Oh right I forgot, I'm to illiterate to understand "Oh So Flawless" logic :sdo:

the logical members disagree but I see only us in the thread? and Now you're somehow bringing a mod into this. anymore people you need to bring up or are you actually going to stick to the topic of burden of proof?

 

[ComplexCity]

the logical members disagree but I see only us in the thread? and Now you're somehow bringing a mod into this. anymore people you need to bring up or are you actually going to stick to the topic of burden of proof?

Can you not read? I've already done so. Now a proper rebuttal from you would be to prove how you are logical in your conclusions of deductive reasoning

 

[Dantee]

Can you not read? I've already done so. Now a proper rebuttal from you would be to prove how you are logical in your conclusions of deductive reasoning

Can you not read what you write? who are these logical members you're referencing too when there is only two of us conversing Asking me that question proves you didn't read the op or mine at all. Burden of proof, is the keyword here and what's the thread topic is about. The fact I actually have to pull your leg for you to stick on topic is sad enough.

 

[ComplexCity]

Can you not read what you write? who are these logical members you're referencing too when there is only two of us conversing Asking me that question proves you didn't read the op or mine at all. Burden of proof, is the keyword here and what's the thread topic is about. The fact I actually have to pull your leg for you to stick on topic is sad enough.

So you want me to scavenge the base for members in old threads who laugh at you all the time, when we both know the members that solo you and never take you seriously? :sdo:

How about no, I can name a few members though


Ethris
Retsu
Kidgamer
Nips

Want more names?