<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: pie hole shutting time</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.beerdrinker.org/2003/09/23/pie-hole-shutting-time/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.beerdrinker.org/2003/09/23/pie-hole-shutting-time/</link>
	<description>Beer is Good</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Apr 2010 17:19:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.beerdrinker.org/2003/09/23/pie-hole-shutting-time/comment-page-1/#comment-241</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:02:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beerdrinker.org/?p=234#comment-241</guid>
		<description>I read it, but wasn&#039;t impressed. There was not a great deal of fallacy-dismantling going on, nor even the identification of any fallacies. There was plenty of empty, sort-of-comical retorts to some of the points, but they did not amount to much more than insult and ad hominem. In fact, the respondent seemed to engage in more fallacy-peddling than Prager: straw man argument, ad hominem, deliberate misrepresentation of the original ideas for comical effect. Not exactly a convincing defeat of Prager&#039;s argument. In fact, it is more bluster and bombast than anything, and the fawning comments evidence of the fact that people can be more swayed by clever and emotionally charged phrases than reason.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read it, but wasn&#8217;t impressed. There was not a great deal of fallacy-dismantling going on, nor even the identification of any fallacies. There was plenty of empty, sort-of-comical retorts to some of the points, but they did not amount to much more than insult and ad hominem. In fact, the respondent seemed to engage in more fallacy-peddling than Prager: straw man argument, ad hominem, deliberate misrepresentation of the original ideas for comical effect. Not exactly a convincing defeat of Prager&#8217;s argument. In fact, it is more bluster and bombast than anything, and the fawning comments evidence of the fact that people can be more swayed by clever and emotionally charged phrases than reason.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
