elephant hurling

[Anonymous No.14711493]

goys look what I found
>The fallacy of elephant hurling, arises when the debater start to amassing huge quotes, accumulating a large amount of evidence supposedly supporting his position, to give the impression of weighty evidence, but without demonstrating that all the evidence does indeed support his argument. The debater has the undeclared assumption that accumulating a great deal of evidence out of context would make his ideas seem true.
the essence of "virology" and pseudo science shilling here

[Anonymous No.14711636]

>>14711493
I prefer the term "preponderance bias". Came up with it last night. Its the tendency for some individual to believe a claim is valid based solely on having been presented with a glut of circumstancial evidence or anecdotes. Its a sort of unconscious bias that is easily exploited by mass shilling of a cetrain thing until the target starts to believe it.

[Anonymous No.14711736]

>>14711636
>tendency for some individual to believe a claim is valid based solely on having been presented with a glut of circumstancial evidence or anecdotes
I've seen a lot of this with maskers, who seem to believe wearing a mask protects them even though officially guidelines say the opposite

[Anonymous No.14712711]

>>14711636
This is what I found with the toxicity of lead. Tons and tons of evidence, but all of extremely poor quality. Same with the other heavy metals.

[Anonymous No.14712737]

>>14711493
The essence of modern "science" in general.
Before the heavy metals, I came across some pretty good evidence that Alzheimer's is a disease from copper deficiency. Like actual autopsies showing that copper is missing from the people's brains. This was completely ignored and buried under tons of the bullshit about amyloid plaques instead of being studied further. (and reportedly, studying any other hypothesis was essentially forbidden; you had to study amyloid plaques if you wanted any money granted for your research. )

[Anonymous No.14712739]

>>14711493
stop ban evading

[Anonymous No.14713765]

>>14711493
This is just whining and nonsense to support "sealioning".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
It demands excessive time and energy allocated towards someone who has not adequatelty proven they will deliver an ROI. Further it has the embedded presupposition of realtime conversation, or debate, which is not always the case. Lastly it is adversarial in nature and operates from an external locus of control. Not everyone cares about proselytism, acting to convince, convert, and recruit a hypothetical opponent and audience. If someone can't even sample through the evidence provided and use their own brain, why would it be worthwhile to waste your time and energy spoonfeeding them?

"Elephant hurling" is basically the whining of an overgrown infant. What you're talking about here is rather a form of esotericism while forcing a choice and demanding faith, it's evidence theater and fraud.

[Anonymous No.14713785]

>>14711636
>preponderance bias
Much better name and since OP's terminology seems to come from a USENET posting or some similar shit I do recommend future archeologists adopt the term "preponderance bias" instead. Heil Hitler 1488

[Anonymous No.14713794]

>>14712739
>jannies need a special GUI to apprehend ban evaders
lmao suck my dick with a condom, you poxied faggots

[Anonymous No.14713833]

>>14712739