http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting).

LOL Grum – I think that is AKA an internet forum….

It did start with an attack on the article, strange use of information and lack of point then used his “Previous” to establish that he may be lacking in suitable credibility.

This isn’t an online version of the Oxford Union or a forum version of Nature.

Or should we all start Harvard referencing and spoil basically what is a bit of banter.

I wouldn’t mind it if someone posted some good articles that back up Monbiot but I have a feeling that instead of totally abolishing farming subsidies perhaps they just need some reform.

It’s mostly not ad hom… Ad hom would be “He is a cock. Therefore his argument is invalid”. But this thread is mainly just focusing on the “he is a cock” part and not worrying itself too much about his argument.

He IS a cock.