A note to the exorcists

[Hakki Alacakaptan]

Ken, if you want to know where I'm posting from paste my IP into
http://where-is.info/ or some other similar server.
If you want to check the validity of my arguments, read them (instead of
relying on second-hand polemics). There is no logical contradiction that
stops you from doing so.
E.g. if I ask for proof that a certain report's findings are false, this
means disproving a set of factual propositions. Nothing to do with
disproving a negative. If I ask for additional proof to fill the
widely-reported holes in the prosecution's case against the Libyans, this
again is not a negative statement. The pseudo-logical smokescreen is meant
to conceal the absence of counter-arguments, and it seems to be doing the
job.
OTOH if you're only interested in the logical problem per se, do go on, but
please change the thread so I can ignore it.

Thanks.

Hakki

 || -----Original Message-----

 || From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com

 || [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Ken Hanly

 ||

 ||

 || Sorry I thought that Hakki not Chip made the remark about proving a

 || negative. Anyway there is no logical difficulty with doing so

 || that I see. Of

 || the examples Chip gives are not that problematic. Surely there

 || is lots of

 || positive evidence that Hakki posts from where he posts--and I

 || assume it is

 || not Hackensack N.J. If that positive can proved then the same

 || form I used

 || earlier gives you:

 ||      If Hakki posted from Hackensack NJ....then he did not post from

 || x--where x is the place he did post from. But he did post from

 || x therefore

 || he did not post from Hackensack.

 ||

 || If you want to be stubborn enough you can reject all the evidence for

 || positive proposition such as the earth is round by making enough special

 || assumptions.

 ||

 || Cheers, Ken Hanly

 || ----- Original Message -----

 || From: "Chip Berlet" <cberlet at igc.org>

 || To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>

 || Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 10:42 AM

 || Subject: RE: A note to the exorcists

 ||

 ||

 || > Hakki,

 || >

 || > Thanks for being so gracious.

 || >

 || > As for you comments below, it is the first rule of logical

 || fallacies that

 || > you cannot prove a negative.

 || >

 || > Go ahead and try:

 || >

 || > Prove that you do not work for the U.S. government as an

 || agent tasked to

 || > disrupt the left by spreading conspiracist theories.

 || >

 || > Prove that you are not really posting these messages from

 || Hackensack, New

 || > Jersey.

 || >

 || > Prove that the Libyan spy agency does not secretly own the Fox News

 || Channel.

 || >

 || > Sigh...

 || >

 || > -Chip

 || >

 || >

 || > > I suggest you contribute to the list by showing us your

 || > > research. What have

 || > > you got to offer that disproves the Interfor report? How can

 || > > you prove that

 || > > the holes in the case against the Libyans aren't there?

 || > > Without evidence,

 || > > your opinions are uninteresting.

 || > >

 || > > Hakki

 || > >

 || >

 ||