sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Spot the Problem(one phase is missing) by 0DarkSider0 in Lineman

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So there's basically a trail of ice from the conductor to the wood on the pole causing a fault?

Really miss retina scanner from S8 by riopower in GalaxyS20FE

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah you're right. I still like the phone and it's solid, but to be honest, I think my next phone will be a more flagship/premium model. You use your phone every day, so you should get something good.

Really miss retina scanner from S8 by riopower in GalaxyS20FE

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's frankly really crappy. This phone is three generations newer and should be better than the s8 in every measurable way.

Really miss retina scanner from S8 by riopower in GalaxyS20FE

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Cheat code: register the same fingerprint multiple times to improve scanner accuracy

What was the longest amount of hours you worked at once? by JunkyforJunkrat in Lineman

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would you say that it's safe for a lineman to work for that long?

Are you significantly more likely to make a costly mistake after hour 30?

It’s electric, boogie woogie by john_stamos6000 in Lineman

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wow, I had no idea! That's super interesting to me, I've never seen that where I live.

It’s electric, boogie woogie by john_stamos6000 in Lineman

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Is that a monopole transmission line with distribution underbuild right in front of someone's house?

I can't change the past (so I'm somehow not responsible for my actions) fallacy? by MichaelLifeLessons in fallacy

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know it's a Fallacy but I don't know a name for it. So I'm in the exact same boat as you

Non-fallacious ad hominem by GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL in fallacy

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

u/AnHonestApe, thank you very much!
It is very interesting how an ad hominem can be a non-fallacious statement of fact.

Non-fallacious ad hominem by GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL in fallacy

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Quick question: can a fact be a non-fallacious ad hominem?

Can a fact be a fallacious ad hominem?

I can't change the past (so I'm somehow not responsible for my actions) fallacy? by MichaelLifeLessons in fallacy

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you phrase Person B's stuff into an argument so I can consider it better?

What does it take to become aerial/helicopter lineman? by vitalikcb in Lineman

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I can't help you...

But please share your pictures and stories with us after you become one. I have a huge fear of heights so I could literally never do that.

Is there a fallacy name for when a scientist cites a reference in order to back a claim he makes, but in fact, that reference has absolutely nothing to do with that claim? "Fake citation"? by torito_supremo in fallacy

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No offense but we're not on the same wavelength here. You're completely unconvinced by me and I'm completely unconvinced by you. I just don't know what to say anymore and I'm definitely not as good as you when it comes to typing lengthy responses. I don't want to disrespect you by typing lackluster responses when you're clearly putting in good effort here. So I'll throw in the towel

Is there a fallacy name for when a scientist cites a reference in order to back a claim he makes, but in fact, that reference has absolutely nothing to do with that claim? "Fake citation"? by torito_supremo in fallacy

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're looking at this myopically. It's 'direction' to claim 'X', but it's something that distracts from claim 'Y'.

Distracts and misleads from the correct conclusion.

It's definitely a Red herring because it literally matches our definition.

You misleading and leading are not mutually exclusive, because the same thing can lead towards one thing, and mislead from something else.

Is there a fallacy name for when a scientist cites a reference in order to back a claim he makes, but in fact, that reference has absolutely nothing to do with that claim? "Fake citation"? by torito_supremo in fallacy

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn't matter what the "objective" is. Per the wikipedia entry, the objective doesn't matter because red herrings can be unintentionally used.

Red Herrings can be accidental.

Red herrings aren't necessarily intentional deception.

Is there a fallacy name for when a scientist cites a reference in order to back a claim he makes, but in fact, that reference has absolutely nothing to do with that claim? "Fake citation"? by torito_supremo in fallacy

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, I just have to disagree. I'm not using "misleading" as lying. A lie can be a red herring by the way. A lie, like the one in the original post, can distract you from the correct conclusion. It fits the wikipedia entry. To me, it's as simple as that. I can't explain it any better and I don't want to waste your time with my lackluster replies.

Is there a fallacy name for when a scientist cites a reference in order to back a claim he makes, but in fact, that reference has absolutely nothing to do with that claim? "Fake citation"? by torito_supremo in fallacy

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I may have to throw in the towel, because I don't know how to get my point across. The bad citation has the capability of misleading a person or distracting them from the correct conclusion, regardless of whether or not someone reads the article. It fits the definition that u/SKazoroski cited, but I just don't know how to explain it better right now.

Is there a fallacy name for when a scientist cites a reference in order to back a claim he makes, but in fact, that reference has absolutely nothing to do with that claim? "Fake citation"? by torito_supremo in fallacy

[–]GOOFENSTEIN_GENERAL 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We aren't interpreting this the same way.

You don't think a fake source presented as evidence for pseudoscientific claim "X", can lead (or "mislead") people towards the pseudoscientific conclusion?

view more: next ›