Is he appealing to bias

 

There is this guy who after I give evidence says:

Here's a bunch of videos about ancient aliens. Get ready to have your mind blown. It wouldn't be online if it wasn't true!

But he isn't showing how my source is biased or wrong at all. And he responds:

So I should apply critical thinking by doing your research for you...

 

Is he being obtuse?

The guy says: “It wouldn't be online if it wasn't true.” This is a burden of proof issue. He presented the proposition. He has the burden of proof. Always check your premises first. Here, it is an unsubstantiated premise.

To assess whether the individual in question is appealing to bias, let's analyze their statements for logical fallacies, cognitive biases, poor logic, or poor reasoning.

### First Statement:
> "Here's a bunch of videos about ancient aliens. Get ready to have your mind blown. It wouldn't be online if it wasn't true!"

#### Logical Fallacies and Cognitive Biases:
1. **Appeal to Ridicule**: The way the individual presents the videos about ancient aliens seems to mock the notion that something is true just because it is online. This can be seen as an attempt to ridicule rather than engage in a legitimate critique of the evidence you presented.

2. **Straw Man Fallacy**: The individual appears to be misrepresenting your argument by implying that your evidence is equally as dubious as videos about ancient aliens, rather than addressing the actual evidence you provided.

3. **Appeal to Popularity**: The sarcastic comment "It wouldn't be online if it wasn't true!" implicitly mocks the idea that the mere presence of something online validates its truth. This type of argument does not actually address the legitimacy or bias of your evidence.

### Second Statement:
> "So I should apply critical thinking by doing your research for you..."

#### Logical Fallacies and Cognitive Biases:
1. **Straw Man Fallacy**: This response misrepresents your position as expecting them to do your research for you, instead of acknowledging that you provided evidence and are looking for a critical engagement with that evidence.

2. **Evasion**: This response sidesteps the responsibility of critically engaging with the evidence you provided by framing your request as unreasonable. This is a way of avoiding the argument rather than addressing it substantively.

#### Is He Appealing to Bias?
He is not addressing your evidence critically or showing how it might be biased or wrong. Instead, he uses deflections and ridicule, which are poor reasoning tactics. While he is not explicitly appealing to any specific bias, his responses exhibit cognitive biases and logical fallacies that undermine meaningful discussion and critical analysis. In this sense, he might not be directly appealing to bias, but he is certainly not engaging in a logically sound or fair critique of your evidence. This can make him appear obtuse and unwilling to engage constructively.