Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Valpal1; Just sayin

The burden of proof in a standard debate is upon the claimant.

There is simply not time for a defendant to run out and "disprove" a claim or to search for that needle in a haystack.

This is report-writing and debating 101.

This is an impartial observation; I have not taken the time to see who presented which fact without presenting supporting evidence.


220 posted on 01/17/2007 10:58:38 AM PST by TaxRelief (Wal-Mart: Keeping my family on-budget since 1993.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies ]


To: TaxRelief
There is simply not time for a defendant to run out and "disprove" a claim or to search for that needle in a haystack.

Bravo Sierra, this is an internet forum. An additional browser window and a search engine are 1 click away. Anyone with a modest IQ and not completely in the grip of their own emotionally laden perceptions/beliefs can quickly check the probability/improbability factor of anyone's claims regarding most if not all historical events. Particularly those involving recent media created celebrity crime stories.

224 posted on 01/17/2007 11:08:13 AM PST by Valpal1 (Social vs fiscal conservtism? Sorry, I'm not voting my wallet over the broken bodies of the innocent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies ]

To: TaxRelief

That would be why I kept my claims to the area 'as how I see it'. I have said clearly i isno something I could prove.

I have said I have not seen anything to explain what I perceive to be the case. I was being very careful to keep it honest and open, that it was how I see it, as opposed to saying how it is and claiming I was presenting facts. I did no such thing as to present this perception as fact.

I have taken an open position asking that if this information is available, I would love to see it. That is met with what is seen here.

However, it was presented as fact that this information is so easily found, so needle in a haystack doesn't really appply if that statement is true. Also it puts the ball in the court of the person that claimed fact rather than perception.

It was said that this information COULD be produced so there is no valid reason not to do so. If not out of common courtesy, out of desire to end debate it could easily be done right? Were I shown information I have not seen, my position of perception could easily change. That is why I asked for it. New information leads to new perceptions.

But instead, I am just labaled a troll and told to go. I am threatened with mods blah blah blah. I'm tryin to keep it real while some others play games. Who really is the troll here anyway?


226 posted on 01/17/2007 11:11:30 AM PST by Just sayin (Is is what it is, for if it was anything else, it would be isn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson