Nice one laceym!

Excellent!

All these techniques are used by atheist apologists as well ....it's almost impossible to engage people in an interesting way that they want to listen to and construct a technically logical (which system is one going to chose) argument. Check out a logical reason primer text (part of a philosophy degree) to see what I mean. Your logic is as good as your (usually un-stated) assumptions. To obtain the desired end result, simply select the appropriate assumptions. That is why any public debate uses non-logical arguments, to influence the assumptions the hearers will make.

Thank you laceym for this marvellous videoclip....
I just read through the swashbuckling on Ad Hom....
between GD and Gagnon....
I found this video soothing after their match....
I can't remember what it was like finding myself in a pub/brawl (only looking on of course) but the discomfort mixed with a dash of curiosity, kept me going to the (temporary) end of the match, and a funny feeling in my throat told me it was time time to wash it all down with a dose of something like your videoclip...
Thanks.

False dichotomy, I confronted that one recently here on Clipmarks, that is when I asserted a fact that contradicted a statement I was presumed to take the opposite view automatically.

Base on this reasoning then I feel that if one is raised to believe in something for long enough that it's hard to change one's mind. Some will aways feel that there right, your wrong, etc. When someone tells me I'm wrong I go and find an answer to make an argument. I like to argue with the right person. It can be fun.