How bitter normies act when they lose an argument
Low IQ normie: "21 is a prime number"
Rational and intelligent incel: "No it isn't. If you divide 21 by 3 you will get a whole number."
Low IQ normie thinking: "Hmm...He's right. I tried dividing 21 by 3 on my calculator and the answer it gave me was a whole number. This is really humiliating to be wrong - what do I do to make it look like I didn't lose? Wait, I got it!"
Low IQ normie: "Can you show me a peer-reviewed journal article that says 21 is not a prime number?"
28 comments
So, that's basically why "incels" stamp their feet and shout, "BECAUSE I SAY SO!" when you ask them to provide proof of their belief that women, "Chads" and "normies" are evil creatures sent from the depths of hell to prevent them from getting their poor widdle pee-pees wet?
To replicate my response on reddit:
Rational and intelligent incel
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahaha!!!!!
Low IQ normie: "Can you show me a peer-reviewed journal article that says 21 is not a prime number?"
Ah yes, the Straw Skeptic. Congratulation, your belief system is now officially intellectually bankrupt.
Poe or not, this is so stupid. It's ridiculous even for a fictitious conversation. If he is so rational and intelligent then why didn't he pose an actual math problem in his straw man argument? Better yet, if he is rational and intelligent then why did he make a straw man argument?
And since we're already involving math for no reason, riddle me this, incels...
image
I'm not sure this could even count as a straw man. It's like he wanted to create a straw man, but just had a small handful to build it with. If anything, this isn't a straw man, it's just a straw.
I'm still waiting for an explanation as to how 'Normie' can be an insult ?
Because if these manbabies can't, then they only further prove their FAIL.
I'll admit, I ask for peer-reviewed articles when I encounter HBD or "I'm just asking MRA questions" people, half as a joke and half as a Socratic exercise to make them question where their information comes from if not from the result of a self-correcting system of bias-removal and logical processes.
Taking this argument seriously, the real issue is that one can prove mathematically that 21 is not prime given some common axioms. A valid mathematical proof is stronger than a peer-reviewed journal article, so providing such a proof should satisfy any reasonable skeptic.
Basically, if you a make a claim that I don't believe, I'm going to want evidence for that claim. For most social science issues, peer-reviewed articles are where that evidence exists.
What is this guy even thinking?
(By the way, before I commented, there were 21 comments.)
If he was rational and intelligent, he wouldn't be an "incel".
You don't need to be low-IQ to be wrong. It happens to most people from time to time.
Also, it's rich for an "incel" to call someone else "bitter"...
@Frogflayer
This is false. The prime factorization of a number does not change if it is written in a different base.
Edit: The wording I chose wasn't very good. I had meant to say the prime factorization of a number doesn't change when it is converted to another base. E.g. 2110 and 1516 both have the same factorization as they are equivalent. But this is all irelivant now because I misunderstood that you meant 213 .
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
