Bryan Mullins: Disability isn't even a real thing as shown in The Roast Game Skeptic's video

"You are only asserting that he does, that doesn't prove your point, it only means that you asserted without legitimate proof. ALS is a disease, not a disability." ALS is a disease, disability is an effect. Things cause disabilities, not being able to walk is a disability as defined by the word that is used. "It is only saying that it's a disease that can't be cured. That doesn't make it a disability just because it attacks muscle cells and loses their ability to speak, move, or eat." Yes, it's almost like the disease limits movement and activities, fits the definition of a disability. "Yes, it has been done. I made sure that my argument made sense, in order to verify it to be true." Has it? "I am disproving disability by being skeptical and using my skepticism to debunk "disability." You don't understand skepticism and skeptics in general." As I explained, skepticism doesn't disprove (falsify) anything, it's questioning the validity, authenticity. If I doubt the claim that the supernatural exists, does it automatically disprove the supernatural? "Here is my main argument, If you are able to do anything without the help of others, you are not disabled. If you are choosing to be in a wheelchair, but not having the chance to get out, you're still not disabled, you're just refusing to get out of the wheelchair." The keyword is choosing. If you are choosing to be in a wheelchair, I don't think you are disabled. Keeping with my example, people with ALS who survive don't choose to be in a wheelchair, they don't have a choice. It sounds like you are asserting that disability is not a thing because those who claim to have them are not necessarily disabled, that doesn't make disability not a thing. This seems a lot like cherry-picking to serve your argument. "So, you are a flat earthed and a believer in aliens. No one can trust a person like you, because most people don't believe in a flat earth, they believe in a round earth (oblate spheroid)" I'm not sure if this is an example or you are calling me a flat-earther. If you are calling me a flat-earther, you're mistaken, cause I said I'm skeptical of that claim. If this is an example, no one believes flat-earthers that is because there's already evidence to the contrary. "No one wants to believe in someone that does not exist. No one wants to believe in supernatural things in this world. Therefore, you are not a skeptic." Yet a lot of people do believe in something that doesn't exist. Actually, it's better to say that a lot of people believe in things that has not been demonstrated to exist. Many people believe in god, the supernatural, aliens, and a flat earth, these claims have not been demonstrated to exist, therefore I'm skeptical of these claims, I do not accept these claims. "Okay, so what is your point of arguing otherwise, instead of defending this point. It is not out of context if it makes sense or if it is clear within the context debunking that word." You're making the claim that disabilities don't exist. However, you narrow disability to mean you have to be essentially dead. Yet that is not what the word means. We don't use the word in a context in relation to living, we use the word in context in relation to what you're disabled of. With ALS the disability is that they physically cannot walk. It limits movement that they otherwise should have.