Evidence to prove a suspect valid

[GUT]

G'Day Tom and Errata

Gimme a break I barely speak English now I've gotta master Latin and German.

GUT

[Tom_Wescott]

Gimme a break. I almost never bust out Latin

No, but when you do, I will be waiting in the wings with some German.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Hello CD. Thanks. You refer to Kate?

You cannot prove she was a prostitute any more than I can prove the converse.

But have you looked up the informal fallacy to which Errata referred? She is spot on.

Cheers.
LC

Well, there was a police officer who identified her as a prostitute.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[c.d.]

G'Day




AND I thought he killed everyone, everywhere for all time.

GUT

Hello Gut,

Please don't say things like that. The anti-Jack crowd will pick up on it and use it in their posts when they want to be smart ass and sarcastic.

c.d.

[GUT]

G'Day

And just for the record, I have never been aware that anyone who believes Jack killed the C5 has ever stated that he killed every single woman in Whitechapel.

AND I thought he killed everyone, everywhere for all time.

GUT

[c.d.]

Hello CD. Thanks. You refer to Kate?

You cannot prove she was a prostitute any more than I can prove the converse.

But have you looked up the informal fallacy to which Errata referred? She is spot on.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

As I have stated before, God himself could not convince you that any of these women were prostitutes.

As for Errata's post, while nicely argued, I think it is comparing apples to oranges. I will state my question again taken from an earlier post...why are we equating ANY knife murder of a woman to one where the woman was a prostitute and had her throat cut and her internal organs removed and there was no known motive? Even if you take out the prostitute requirement it is still a valid question.

And just for the record, I have never been aware that anyone who believes Jack killed the C5 has ever stated that he killed every single woman in Whitechapel.

c.d.

[Errata]

Hello Errata. Thanks.

But you certainly spotted the one fallacy that has been my pet peeve, almost from day one.

Cheers.
LC

Well I do a lot of work with health care issues, and it is the single most popular and dangerous fallacy in health care. Vaccinations are a big one. My child was diagnosed with autism after a vaccination, ergo the vaccination caused Autism. But the truth of the matter is that symptoms of autism almost always set in right about the age of two. Which happens to be when kids get this particular vaccine. Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

And crusading for the mentally ill gets you a lot of stories. "My son was put on Prozac because he was depressed, he killed himself, ergo the Prozac made him kill himself". Huh? You don't think maybe the depression has something to do with that? Or "my sister was diagnosed Bipolar and she became a lesbian, ergo Bipolar made her a deviant". Or "This guy was diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, and he went and killed a bunch of people, ergo mentally ill people are dangerous." As though the diagnosis of a condition a person has had for years magically makes them monsters all of the sudden. It's pretty brutal.

And oh my god the laughs you would have at the bizarre logic that comes from people trying to not have a baby. I did this wacky thing, I didn't get pregnant, ergo it prevents pregnancy. No it doesn't. You just did unspeakable things with soft drinks for no reason. And it is damned hard not to laugh in these poor girls faces, but it's whats called magical thinking.

Let me put it to you this way. My aunt took my cousin to go see Santa. Nine months later, my baby cousin was born. Ergo Santa brought my cousin a baby sister. Or ergo Santa is my baby cousin's father. Or ergo my aunt has a twisted fetish for Jolly old Elves.

The visit to Santa did not cause my baby cousin to be born. Yes, one came after the other, but one did not cause the other.

[lynn cates]

well spotted

Hello Errata. Thanks.

But you certainly spotted the one fallacy that has been my pet peeve, almost from day one.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

fallacy

Hello CD. Thanks. You refer to Kate?

You cannot prove she was a prostitute any more than I can prove the converse.

But have you looked up the informal fallacy to which Errata referred? She is spot on.

Cheers.
LC

[Errata]

Hello Errata. I appreciate your most reasonable post.

If there are future openings for logic faculty, may I put in your name?

Cheers.
LC

Sure. My qualifications are that I took one semester of critical thinking and then saw an episode of The West Wing that reminded me of this particular fallacy.

My hobbies include arguing in order to feel right in a world in which I am often wrong, a pathological trained need to be one of the smartest people in the room, and being unfairly judged by a culture that does not understand my particular makeup. Oh. And I crochet.

[Errata]

Gesundheit.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Gimme a break. I almost never bust out Latin

[c.d.]

I am all for logic and clear reasoning but why are we equating ANY knife murder of a woman to one where the woman was a prostitute and had her throat cut and her internal organs removed and there was no known motive?

c.d.

[lynn cates]

logic opening

Hello Errata. I appreciate your most reasonable post.

If there are future openings for logic faculty, may I put in your name?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

clever ripper

Hello (again) CD. And in how many of them did the Ripper double back and somehow find a way to . . . ?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

intuition

Hello CD. Thanks.

Perhaps. And perhaps his intuition told him Watkins was walking a reverse beat?

Cheers.
LC