On 10/26/2012 10:19 PM, Wes Groleau wrote:
On 10-27-2012 00:07, SMS wrote:
The biggest reason to believe that helmets are effective is that those
against them have such weak, scientifically faulty and statistically
faulty, reasons for their opposition.

When an argument is so fallacious that it proves nothing,
taking it as evidence for the opposing view is equally fallacious.

If the entity putting forth the fallacious argument actually had any
evidence to support their position then they would use it. Therefore the
use of a fallacious argument is pretty good indication that the opposite
of what they are arguing for is true.