Recent Comments

1. about 15 hours ago on Non Sequitur

   Your blanket statement, like the one I was addressing, ignores the much more nuanced reality. Of course it is a fallacy if one says that something is certainly true simply because a single authority has said it is true. But it is not a fallacy to say that someone with expertise is more likely to be correct about matters related to their area of expertise than someone who lacks that expertise. As the Wikipedia entry on “Argument from authority” states: “When used in the inductive method, which implies the conclusions cannot be proven with certainty, this argument can be considered a strong inductive argument and therefore not fallacious. If a person has a credible authority i.e. is an expert in the field in question, it is more likely that their assessments would be correct, especially if there is consensus about the topic between the credible sources.”

2. about 21 hours ago on Non Sequitur

   While in general it is best to attack the argument and not the person making it, a proposition can carry more or less weight depending on who is making it (e.g., a suggestion about health measures has more meaning coming from someone with a medical background).

   In any case, the proposition in the Shakespeare quote is a terrible one no matter who was making it, and not just because killing people out of hand is not usually consider acceptable in a civilized society. While there are certainly plenty of unethical and greedy lawyers, just as there are such people in any profession, lawyers in general provide valuable and necessary services to society (and no, I’m not a lawyer myself, though I do know quite a few of them).

3. about 22 hours ago on Frazz

   Most countries in east, southeast, and south Asia too. I just came back from a trip where I traveled by train multiple times.

4. 2 days ago on Bloom County

   That’s correct. mgl179 had a comment full of the typical litany of imaginary accusations against Democrats, but he seems to have deleted it. Unfortunately, there’s no way to edit my comment to take that into account. Several of the comments below mine were also directed at mgl179, so they likewise look odd to anyone who doesn’t know who they were addressing.

5. 2 days ago on Super-Fun-Pak Comix

   A clever combination.

6. 3 days ago on Bloom County

   He no doubt believes the right-wing conspiracy theory that Hillary Clinton was personally responsible for that deal, when she was just one of many government officials to sign off on it (and it involved non-weapons-grade uranium that never left the country).

7. 3 days ago on Luann Againn

   That’s hilarious, since it’s the right which is constantly projecting. As I said, there’s a good reason that women mostly vote for Democrats now — they know which party is on their side. As for “biology”, it’s funny how right-wingers will occasionally attempt to use science, which they usually have no respect for at all, to defend their hateful talking points, and in doing so they show that their understanding of it is so rudimentary that it’s essentially non-existent. In this case, the actual science of biology doesn’t say what you think it says.

8. 3 days ago on Peanuts Begins

   No, the one where he starts crossing the street and the “Walk” sign changes to a flashing “Don’t Walk”, so he stops in the middle of the road.

9. 3 days ago on Bloom County

   Consistency isn’t a Republican trait, though hypocrisy is. Along with projection and made-up BS, both of which can be seen in the comment immediately above mine.

10. 4 days ago on Peanuts Begins

    This makes me think of that scene from Rain Man.