[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
speaking of strawmen


evidence necessary to convict in a criminal trial is nowhere close to preponderance of evidence or ability to think logically



Look at what Bonds has said
add up all the little things
look at his numbers
look at his pictures

hmmmmmmmmmm... there are quite alot of things I don't have 100% proof for, but it would be insane for me not to believe them




keep going there Cochran

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, RedBean, how could you possibly have been so negligent as to forget about "the little things?"

[/ QUOTE ]

I notice, once again, someone glossing over stuff and trying to identify one point where they can try to twist a semantic argument to discredit the rest of what was said


congrats

[/ QUOTE ]

ALL of those things above are "little things." Basically, you are using the same argument that people use against sabermetrics or statistical analysis in sports. You are saying "Yeah but you gotta see the games." This is a fantastic argument in that it allows you to be right and there is no possible way anyone could ever contradict you.

I'm sure if I say that when I look at his pictures and when I look at all the other stuff, it doesn't seem to me that he must have done steroids, you will say something like "ZOMG YOU ARE SO BLIND AND STUPID ITS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU." Which is extremely constructive.