is an argument analysis platform.

"Failed" social network kill ideas. But "successful" ones trigger new ideas and in the advancement of global knowledge.

it also allows people to spread out 'fake' knowledege (by fake I mean anything that is not true or it is simply a fallacy)

Begging The Question

and we should also know that it helps us to be known with much true news, and we can learn from those fake news

The Mekong Committee made more of a contribution to Southeast Asian regional integration than did the Southeast Asian Peninsular Games

It's cool

Wrong Direction

Whether an organization is cool or not (itself difficult to prove) does not necessarily attest to its usefulness.

a vegan diet is the most ethically viable

When venus flytrap eats flies it is okay to be carnivorous but when we eat plants, it is not. Get lost.

Fallacy Of Red Herring

The venus fly trap needs flies to survive.

The Facebook emotion contagion study was ethical.

No informed consent was obtained.

Prejudicial Language

"informed consent" implies a particular research framing

The Earth has been visited by advanced extraterrestrial aliens.

And because mother told be that gum will get stuck in your stomach if you swallow it.

Poisoning The Well


Gender is NOT a social construct

According to the dictionary, gender is synonymous with sex. Sex is not a social construct.

Begging The Question

The argument is an equivocation. Both words are ambiguous, and do double duty. The fact that word can be used synonymously with another does not mean that there is no distinction to be made in meanings. The question is whether they can be used to mark a real distinction, not whether they can be used not to.

That the drinking age should be raised to 21

You have brain damage :(

Prejudicial Language

Personal attack

In a democracy, voting should be limited to the intelligent, as assessed by a standardized intelligence test.

It would protect the country from the whims of the unintelligent who have no idea what is good for the nation.

Fallacy Of False Cause

Intelligence alone does not determine whether an individual knows what's best for a country. In fact, "what's best" is an at least somewhat subjective notion in itself and people of various sorts, including those of similar intellect will disagree about "what's best".

In a democracy, voting should be limited to the intelligent, as assessed by a standardized intelligence test.

A country run by the learned has a higher chance at being effective than a country governed by all. If the intelligent run the country, then the chances of a democratic mistake go down, because they are intelligent.

Prejudicial Language

This premise conflates intelligence with accuracy, success, and competence. Intelligence has some relationships with those things but is none of them in itself. Many highly intelligent people can also be totally incompetent in various contexts as well as highly unsuccessful and/or inaccurate. Intelligence alone does not replace experience, education, and, dare I say, wisdom. You are displaying a clear overvaluation and positive bias for intellect and intelligence over all the things which must compliment it for it to manifest and work in the world.

The government should be required to use open source software (for civilian operations at least)

It is simply not true that "no other rights are implied". Open Source has an official definition that implies many other rights.

Irrelevant Conclusion

This does not address the primary contention about cost.