Author Topic: Debate Challenges  (Read 17336 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kcrady

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1143
  • Darwins +253/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Your Friendly Neighborhood Cephalopod Overlord
    • My blog
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #203 on: May 06, 2012, 05:58:03 AM »
Jake, thanks for taking up the challenge.  I'm posting here so the debate thread can contain only debate posts.  As for "rules," I propose we use the format I mentioned above.  Since you're the "pro" position, you would go first with your Opening Statement, then I would go with mine.  Opening Statements would contain a basic summary of each sides' arguments.  Then you post the first rebuttal/expanded argument, then I do likewise, and we take turns.  I'm fine with either an open-ended length, or some limit like four "turns" each (or some other number).  After we've taken our maximum number of "turns" or decided we've both made our full cases, we would do our Concluding Statements, you first, then me.

A couple other rules off the top of my head: No YouTube videos, and no plagiarism of anyone else's arguments.  Citations should use proper footnoting (the "Nb" button above the smilies in the "toolbar" area) linking to any sources used, or giving a proper bibliographic citation if we cite a book.

Does that work for you?  Do you have any specific preferences for length of the debate?
"The question of whether atheists are, you know, right, typically gets sidestepped in favor of what is apparently the much more compelling question of whether atheists are jerks."

--Greta Christina

Offline jakec47

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
  • Darwins +4/-13
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #204 on: May 07, 2012, 05:25:58 PM »
That works for me and I have no preferences for the length, it will end when it ends. I will post my opening statement as soon as I can.

Offline kaziglu bey

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 759
  • Darwins +118/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • There is no Big Brother in the sky.
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #205 on: May 15, 2012, 08:38:31 PM »
Awww. It's too bad this debate isn't on. I was rather looking forward to it. It would have been one sided slaughter of legendary proportions.
Seriously though... What would happen if the Great Green Arkleseizure didn't fram up the rammastam before the hermite curve achieved maximum nurdfurdle velocity? Now THAT would be something. AmIrite?

Offline kcrady

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1143
  • Darwins +253/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Your Friendly Neighborhood Cephalopod Overlord
    • My blog
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #206 on: June 02, 2012, 02:34:15 AM »
Yeah, I was looking forward to it too.  Jake said he might be able to return and do it at some point, buuuut, I won't hold my breath.  I'll just have to wait 'till somebody with Tektonics as their home page and dreams of being the next William Lane Craig shows up...  8)
"The question of whether atheists are, you know, right, typically gets sidestepped in favor of what is apparently the much more compelling question of whether atheists are jerks."

--Greta Christina

Offline Barracuda

Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #207 on: July 01, 2012, 09:55:46 PM »
If anyone wants to debate on ethics (I'm a utilitarian), I'm game. Anything under the broad category of ethics.

Offline none

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2804
  • Darwins +11/-4
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #208 on: July 01, 2012, 10:03:37 PM »
I am bored.. lets go.

Offline none

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2804
  • Darwins +11/-4
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #209 on: July 01, 2012, 10:21:00 PM »
If anyone wants to debate on ethics (I'm a utilitarian), I'm game. Anything under the broad category of ethics.
I am bored.... lets go.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 9941
  • Darwins +353/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #210 on: July 02, 2012, 06:57:03 AM »
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Nam

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 8071
  • Darwins +78/-24
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #211 on: August 15, 2012, 09:34:51 PM »
I wish to debate magicmiles on his reasoning of being a member of this website when he has no inclination to actually debate in anything unless it's a topic in which he starts, and based on that: where he states he has other matters to attend to and won't be able to reply until much later yet replies in other topics either derictly or later yet ignoring his own topics that have excessive amounts of replies.

I have an idea as to why this is but I wish to debate the issue with him to find out if what I think is true.

-Nam
"You bowed to the crown of blood
Your foot pierced by a rusty nail" -- Eresto Trejo

Offline Garja

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 757
  • Darwins +37/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #212 on: August 15, 2012, 09:56:32 PM »
"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution."

-Benjamin Franklin

Offline HAL

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4974
  • Darwins +95/-16
  • Gender: Male
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #213 on: August 20, 2012, 07:42:41 AM »
I wish to debate magicmiles on his reasoning of being a member of this website when he has no inclination to actually debate in anything unless it's a topic in which he starts, and based on that: where he states he has other matters to attend to and won't be able to reply until much later yet replies in other topics either derictly or later yet ignoring his own topics that have excessive amounts of replies.

I have an idea as to why this is but I wish to debate the issue with him to find out if what I think is true.

-Nam

I agree with this. As I commented in the latest thread he started but just somehow ran out of time with, theists do this all too often. I wish there was some way to penalize them for wasting people's honest attempts to help them.

Bad, bad magicmiles. Shame on you.

Offline mhaberling

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
  • Darwins +8/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • I could write some personal text here...
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #214 on: December 22, 2012, 07:04:16 PM »
id like to debate bertaberts on this spag crap he keeps pestering me with... if he.can actually logically defend it fine but the more he says the less i think he knows
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." - Benjamin Franklin

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 9941
  • Darwins +353/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #215 on: January 03, 2013, 02:44:28 PM »
Is bertaberts aware of your challenge?  Is he willing to participate?
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline median

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
  • Darwins +23/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Promoter of Reason
    • Talk Origins
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #216 on: March 11, 2013, 08:03:36 PM »
I would like to challenge Wayne Harropson on the question: Are Wayne Harropson's Extraordinary Experiences From Yahweh?

There are quite a few people I would like to invite into this discussion but I've never done this before on WWGHA. So please let me know how to go about this. Thanks all. Love this forum.
ATHEISM: NOT A RELIGION, A RELATIONSHIP...WITH REALITY

Offline Anfauglir

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4784
  • Darwins +208/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Debate Challenges
« Reply #217 on: April 20, 2013, 12:13:39 PM »
From the "Believing in god is not a Bad Thing" thread:

And secondly, you must be able to demonstrate that your definition of god is correct, and my definition is wrong.  And - sorry to say - to do that, I rather suspect you will need to show some evidence.....

That is a subject for another thread.

Just to clarify: are you saying that you ARE prepared to demonstrate your definition of god is correct, and provide evidence to support it, in another thread?  If so I would be more than happy to discuss it with you in the debate room: the benefit to you there is that you would only be discussing it with me, and not have to field umpteen questions from several other participants.

Shall I request that a debate be set up for us Junebug?  Or are you, perhaps, using "this is not the thread to discuss evidence" as a shield.....?

Before we continue with that discussion, I must ask what your qualifications are. Are you an expert scientist ready to conduct experiments and if so what kind of experiments are we going to do? My "report"evidence was dismissed by screwey as legal evidence not scientific, but I am more than happy to cooperate with any expert scientist with knowledge and equipment. Maybe WE could solve the mystery once and for all!

I'm not the one dictating what a person can say and what they can't. This is a major reason I wouldn't want to live in an atheist environment, no freedom of speech.

The only experiment I have ever conducted is trying the philosophies I have mentioned in my life with very successful results. It would be my pleasure to share with you Anf.

I'll take that as a "yes" then - I'll get the debate set up.  Looking forward to it.

Junebug has agreed to debate me on the evidence she has for her god.  I would appreciate it if a debate room could be set up please.
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.