godrulz said:
His points beg the question and rely on circular reasoning (assume what trying to prove). We need to show the non sequitur nature of his logic (his points do not follow from one another...if one assumption is wrong, the error is carried forward).
(You mean like this?)
I want to rip to shreds, once and for all, the silliness in the idea that life exists on Earth.
Let us begin....
Animals can fly.
Nobody can deny this very simple fact.
Wings are designed to allow for flight and since we do indeed find
them on animals, there is no denying that they are for the flight of the animal.
Derivation 1
From the above we derive that elephants fly.
This agrees with the fact that elephants are animals and since it is a fact that animals can fly, we can conclude that the elephant does indeed fly.
Derivation 2
From the above we derive that all elephants attempt to land on trees.
Given the ability to fly, the elephant is able to lift himself from the ground, allowing him to reach the level of trees and thereby given the ability to reach up to it in order to land.
Derivation 3
From the above we can derive that there are no trees.
Due to the extreme weight of an elephant, trees cannot exist due to them all being crushed with the many elephants attempting to land on their branches.
Derivation 4
From the above we can derive that there is no life on Earth since life cannot exist without the existance of trees.
