I wish I could make this up.

Jake Starkey said:
He made the claim, so it is his burden of proof. All we have to do is point out he is offered no factual evidence.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
The OP was correctly stated.
Your knee-jerk reaction was typical.
You were then offered a copy of the application form showing the OP was correct.
I gave you time to digest and understand all three of those short paragraphs on the official NYC form.
I then challenged you to refute the OP.
Again, your reaction provided no proof that the OP was incorrect.
Instead, you reacted with your usual denial and deflection.
You are a fool.
BTW,
I did not expect any response from Creepus as he/she/alphabet runs from facts.
Why Mr. Tiny Penis bothered to intervene is a mystery.
 
Lionfish said:
Wrong.
The OP was correctly stated.
Your knee-jerk reaction was typical.
You were then offered a copy of the application form showing the OP was correct.
I gave you time to digest and understand all three of those short paragraphs on the official NYC form.
I then challenged you to refute the OP.
Again, your reaction provided no proof that the OP was incorrect.
Instead, you reacted with your usual denial and deflection.
You are a fool.
BTW,
I did not expect any response from Creepus as he/she/alphabet runs from facts.
Why Mr. Tiny Penis bothered to intervene is a mystery.
Click to expand...
Little Jakey-poo doesn't grasp logical deduction/linear thought....
 
Jake Starkey said:
He made the claim, so it is his burden of proof. All we have to do is point out he is offered no factual evidence.
Click to expand...
Wrong. The post was made.
Your kneekerk reaction was typical.
You were then offered a copy of the application form proving the OP was correct.
I gave you time to digest and understand all three of those short paragraphs on the official form from NYC.
I then challenged you to refute the OP.
Again, your reaction provided no proof that the OP was incorrect. and you reflected back to your usual denial and deflection.
You aere a fool
Dutch Uncle said:
^^^
Puts the "moron" in Fucking Moron. :rofl2: :ROFLMAO: :rofl2:

It pays more than you ever earned, son.

www.nbcnewyork.com

Wanted: Emergency shovelers to clear NYC snow from blizzard. How much does it pay?

Want to earn $19 an hour? New York City is putting the call out for emergency shovelers ahead of a potential blizzard this weekend.
www.nbcnewyork.com www.nbcnewyork.com
“You too can become an emergency snow shoveler," Mamdani said Saturday in a plea for New Yorkers to step up during the storm. "Just show up at your local sanitation garage between 8 a.m. and 1 p.m. tomorrow with your paperwork.”

The Department of Sanitation pays $19.14 per hour of shoveling plus overtime ($28.71 after 40 hours in a week).
Click to expand...
Fake ignore is the best.
 
Lionfish said:
Wrong.
The OP was correctly stated.
Your knee-jerk reaction was typical.
You were then offered a copy of the application form showing the OP was correct.
I gave you time to digest and understand all three of those short paragraphs on the official NYC form.
I then challenged you to refute the OP.
Again, your reaction provided no proof that the OP was incorrect.
Instead, you reacted with your usual denial and deflection.
You are a fool.
BTW,
I did not expect any response from Creepus as he/she/alphabet runs from facts.
Why Mr. Tiny Penis bothered to intervene is a mystery.
Click to expand...

You are wrong, Lionfish. He made a claim. He did not support it. I don't have to prove anything other than to point out his remarks mean nothing without evidence.
 
Teflon Don said:
So either the JPP marxists are stupid are completely missing the point on purpose.

The point is that supposedly showing an ID in order to vote is racist and disenfranchises the coloreds according to JPP marxists. But, when a commie demands that you show ID in order to make a few bucks shoveling snow in a once in a generation snowstorm, that isn't racist and that doesn't disenfranchise the coloreds.

Maybe the irony is lost on JPP marxists? Or maybe they really are that disingenuous?
Click to expand...
There is no reason to implement any new polices or procedures. Voting is already secure. All you're doing is looking for barriers to it.
 
Jake Starkey said:
You are wrong, Lionfish. He made a claim. He did not support it. I don't have to prove anything other than to point out his remarks mean nothing without evidence.
Click to expand...
Legina is in cognitive decline and needs Damo to protect her.

The change, meaning deterioration, is why she's on my Dead Pool list....although she might be bumped for Teflon Don. LOL
 
Lionfish said:
Wrong. The post was made.
Your kneekerk reaction was typical.
You were then offered a copy of the application form proving the OP was correct.
I gave you time to digest and understand all three of those short paragraphs on the official form from NYC.
I then challenged you to refute the OP.
Again, your reaction provided no proof that the OP was incorrect. and you reflected back to your usual denial and deflection.
You aere a fool

Fake ignore is the best.
Click to expand...

If a person makes a claim without any evidence, does his opponent have to give evidence why he in refutation of an opinion?

A person who makes a claim without offering any evidence carries the full burden of proof, and the opponent does not have to provide evidence to refute it. This principle is well‑established in philosophy, logic, and law.

Two key principles apply:

  • Hitchens’s Razor: “What may be asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.” This means an unevidenced claim can be rejected without counter‑evidence.
  • Argument from ignorance (a fallacy): It is a fallacy to claim something is true simply because it has not been proven false—or vice versa. If the claimant provides no evidence, the opponent

www.law.cornell.edu/wex/burden_of_proof?utm_source=copilot.com

The law disagrees with you, Lionfish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top