Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivisectus
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vivisectus
So according to you the book contains assumptions that are presented as claims? And you just decide which is which?
|
Quote:
|
These were not claims. You cannot use this as a reason to dismiss his entire discovery.
|
I suppose you are right: they are presented as facts, complete with a percentage even. And look! It is not 99%, but a precise 98%.
But it turns out this is a mere assumption?
So what else is presented as fact, but turns out to be just an assumption? |
If you choose to believe that his discoveries are nothing more than assumptions because he used 98% to mean "the majority" (he didn't mean 98% to be taken literally which would have to be backed up by data sets), then do what you must do. |
Not just the majority, a
vast majority. 98 out of every 100.
The problem is that we are supposed to believe that this guy was able to "astutely observe" things that we are then expected to believe. Here we have him making outlandish claims about homosexuality, and trying to make them seem like facts by expressing his opinions by means of a fake percentage.
You seem to agree he was actually wrong about this: you said "we now know there is a huge genetic component".
But on the other hand, we are expected to believe his claims about how conscience works... because according to you they are "astute observations".
It seems your corrupted text is once again dishonestly presented: since neither he nor you present any evidence, we have to make an estimation of his ability to make accurate claims. But claims that he made during his lifetime and that turned out to be wrong are removed.
I wonder if he would approve of such underhanded tactics.