*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[Poopadoop]

It definitely does not mean it's true. Apparently the word we use for that is "interesting"

Yes or no answer please. Does it mean A is false?

And a follow-up:

If the answer is 'no' then are you an idiot if you argue that it does mean A is false?

[TheSpoonald]

Yes or no answer please. Does it mean A is false?

And a follow-up:

If the answer is 'no' then are you an idiot if you argue that it does mean A is false?

Imagine there is a lake called "Lake Trump Campaign"

All of the water in that lake represents stuff the campaign did

If any of the water is frozen, it means someone did something bad.

We want to find out if any of the water in Lake Trump Campaign is frozen. So we dispatch the SS Mueller to investigate. But Mueller can't say something is "frozen". He can only say if it's "not frozen".

So he sails around, checks out all the water and says it's "not frozen".

Then off in the distance he sees a mist. It looks like fog. It looks like water that is "not frozen". But he can't be sure that it isn't drifting snow. It technically could be drifting snow, there is just no way to tell for sure. But it's probably, in fact overwhelmingly likely, that it's just fog.

So Mueller makes no conclusion on the mist.

Is that the same as finding ice?

[Poopadoop]

Imagine there is a lake called "Lake Trump Campaign"

All of the water in that lake represents stuff the campaign did

If any of the water is frozen, it means someone did something bad.

We want to find out if any of the water in Lake Trump Campaign is frozen. So we dispatch the SS Mueller to investigate. But Mueller can't say something is "frozen". He can only say if it's "not frozen".

So he sails around, checks out all the water and says it's "not frozen".

Then off in the distance he sees a mist. It looks like fog. It looks like water that is "not frozen". But he can't be sure that it isn't drifting snow. It technically could be drifting snow, there is just no way to tell for sure. But it's probably, in fact overwhelmingly likely, that it's just fog.

So Mueller makes no conclusion on the mist.

Is that the same as finding ice?

You don't need complicated analogies unless you're trying to obfuscate things.

It's really really really simple.

Either A or B is possible. You're allowed to answer either A or not answer the question.

Q1 you say A.
Q2 you give no answer.

End of story.

The question was not: 'what do you do if you see mist?'.

The question was: given the above restrictions, can you conclude that the answer to Q2 is A?

I'll give you a hint: the correct response is 'no'.

The follow-up question was: if you insist on answering 'yes' to the above, are you an idiot?
(the answer is 'yes, you are')

We'll make it even more interesting and fun for kids now. If you insist on refusing to answer 'no' to the above, what does that make you?

[TheSpoonald]

Either A or B is possible. You're allowed to answer either A or not answer the question.

Q1 you say A.
Q2 you give no answer.

The question was: given the above restrictions, can you conclude that the answer to Q2 is A?

That's not the question. The question is why do you think the answer to Q2 is B. It could just be not A. Just like fog is not ice.

[Poopadoop]

That's not the question. The question is why do you think the answer to Q2 is B. It could just be not A. Just like fog is not ice.

No, we're still trying to get you to accept that the conclusion isn't A.

[TheSpoonald]

No, we're still trying to get you to accept that the answer isn't A.

I don't accept that because the answer still could be A

[Poopadoop]

I don't accept that because the answer still could be A

See this is where you're struggling with the workings of logic.

The conclusion is most definitely not A. If it was, the answer given would have been A.