Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Normal
No one I would wager, but that is not the point. I have plenty of left leaning friends who take the idea of MAD as gospel truth. The only evidence mad worked in the absence of nuclear war. Therefore, there is no evidence it worked, and it is a fallacy and should be discarded. Exactly. There is no evidence to back up either one, yet one seems to be taken as a legitimate claim, and one is laughed off as bogus. My question was simply why, when the logic used to arrive at the conclusions was the same. MAD - unproven idea.Bush policies preventing terror attacks - unproven idea.Why is one viewed as legit and one not?
No one I would wager, but that is not the point.
I have plenty of left leaning friends who take the idea of MAD as gospel truth. The only evidence mad worked in the absence of nuclear war. Therefore, there is no evidence it worked, and it is a fallacy and should be discarded.
Exactly. There is no evidence to back up either one, yet one seems to be taken as a legitimate claim, and one is laughed off as bogus. My question was simply why, when the logic used to arrive at the conclusions was the same.
MAD - unproven idea.
Bush policies preventing terror attacks - unproven idea.
Why is one viewed as legit and one not?
