[ZNFYRH]

Zhavric

You and Fangrim are saying two different things. You emphasized them and still think they are the same.

You are saying that if there is observed evidence of a thing being true, then it's opposite is automatically false.

In Logic, you are correct.

Fangrim is saying that if there is observed evidence of a thing being true, then it's opposite is not automatically false.

If Science, Fangrim is correct.

This is what CoffeeSaint said in another thread.

You choose to accept the inference as correct without actually observing the conclusion.

Fangrim wants it to have the support of evidence in order for him to accept it.

The reason Fangrim is disagreeing with you in every thread is because you are presenting your inference as fact. Inferences are only acceptable as fact is someone accepts the premises.

You are trying to "show" and "teach" people that your inference is correct, and they aren't telling you your inference is wrong. Myself, Kam, Fangrim, CoffeeSaint... none of us have said your logic was wrong.

Where you are wrong is insulting and belittling those who don't accept your premises as true. They don't take your word for it. Your context is not acceptable for them.

Whatever you want to call it, the one reason you are facing resistance, or being placed on ignore, is that you are rude to people who don't accept your inference as fact.

That's all there is to it.

For someone who doesn't like tone being read into their statements, you are reading more into the opposition than there actually is.

So take a deep breath, realize that the opposition is to your attitude and not your inference, and realize that your logic is right, but logic isn't everything.