you're always stuck in your hypocritical logic again YOU have dismissed quotes from many , many people who saw them live and in person so you're right back to square one and the argument ad populum most certainly applies its a textbook example , you saying Ronnie is better because a bunch of people say so classic appeal to numbers it proves ONE thing that its a popular opinion Ronnie is the best ever
no, I haven't dismissed quotes from numerous people who saw both compete. You have even posted that many sources. All I've seen from you are the same 3-4 quotes used over and over again. Argument ad populum doesn't apply here b/c I never appealed to numbers to argue why Ronnie is superior. Rather, my purpose for posting the quotes is to show that the best authorities on the matter believe Ronnie at his prime is unbeatable. Your misuse of the argument fallacy would be akin to me disagreeing with 10 physicians who arrived at the same diagnosis and crying "ad populum" to discredit their judgment.
Source:
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/popular.html"Non-fallacious examples of the ad populum: the appeal is not irrelevant when what most persons believe or what the select few believe does in fact determine what is true. Conventional truth such as the definitions of words, standard use of symbols, styles, or political elections are typical examples where the appeal to the majority , the experts, or the people-in-the-know would be relevant and so would not be fallacious.
1. If an elite group of people are in a position to know of what they speak, their authority is relevant and should not automatically be discounted. E.g., to remark that most physicians believe that a high fat diet is unhealthy, so that it follows that persons who have a high fat diet should change their eating habits, is to make a legitimate appeal."
countdown to excuses... 3... 2... 1...
