The Instigator
Frosty5794
Pro (for)
Losing
13 Points
The Contender
Koopin
Con (against)
Winning
60 Points

Time Cube Theory is true

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 12 votes the winner is...
Koopin
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/6/2010 Category: Science
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 7,725 times Debate No: 10716
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (34)
Votes (12)

 

Frosty5794

Pro

If you successfully prove the con arguement, you have the chance of winning $10,000 from Dr. Gene Ray.

For background information on the issue, go to http://timecube.com...
Koopin

Con

Thank you for posting your argument.

Audience, my opponents resolution is.

"If you can prove that the Time Cube Theory is true, then you have a chance of winning $10,000 from Dr. Gene Ray."

This is not true, Dr. Gene Ray offers $10,000 to any academic institution or professor who disproves Time Cube.
For non-academics, the offer is reduced to $1,000.

The resolution has been negated, I thank my opponent for this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
Frosty5794

Pro

I am very sorry for the above confusion, and should like to clarify.

First, my opponent has misquoted me. As you have the power to scroll up the page, a clearly state: "If you successfully prove the con argument, you have the chance of winning $10,000 from Dr. Gene Ray." That is, you have to disprove time cube. While my opponent has this quoted as:"If you can prove that the Time Cube Theory is true, then you have a chance of winning $10,000 from Dr. Gene Ray." They said that I had said that to prove time cube true you can receive the money. So I should hope for Koopin to respond to the above. And yes, you can only receive $10,000 if you are a academic, but only $1,000 if you are not.

Secondly, the general purpose of me posting this debate is to demonstrate exactly why it is important for the burden of truth to be on the affirmative, rather than negative, as it is very difficult to prove even a preposterous idea false. But this does not mean we can accept it to be true.

Here is a video of the application of the time cube kritik in a debate round: (@1:04)
Koopin

Con

Thank you for posting your next argument.

My argument was based off of yours. Your title said Time Cube Theory is true.
But In a debate one does not debate the title, one debates the argument.

I have done so fairly.

You: The pronoun of the second person singular or plural, used of the person or persons being addressed.

I am the person being addressed, I am not an academic. Therefore I have proved your argument wrong.

I encourage you to post an argument in round one in later debates.

I thank you again.

Sources:
(1). http://dictionary.reference.com...
(2). http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Frosty5794

Pro

Ah, but koopin, that was not just the title, but my resolution. That is, I defend everything and anything that is
said at timecube.com. That is the resolution.

You seem to have been mistaken over the resolution.

Again: http://www.timecube.com...
Koopin

Con

Thank you for posting your next argument.

Look at this example,

"Resolved, guns should be allowed for everyone to have.
You can read all about it in the United States Constitution."

You see, in a debate one can not just say go read about something. You must make an actual argument.

Also, have you read that link?

If you want me to debate the stuff your link said, let me just point out some of the things it said.

"White welfare for Black Race fuels inherent slaughter."

"A HOLOCAUST AND IT IS NIGH UPON YOU. HIRED SICK TEACHERS
ARE PAID TO TEACH YOU EVIL TO
ENSLAVE YOU STUPID AND YOU
NOW POSSESS AN IDIOT CYCLOPIC
MENTALITY. YOU LACK THE BRAINS TO KNOW THAT 4 SIMULTANEOUS DAYS ROTATE IN AN IMAGINARY CUBED EARTH.
KEEP IGNORING ME AQND YOU WILL PAY HELL FOR CLAIMING"

Hmm....

here's something else

"Obama must resign to save his people from his catastrophe. SUN power will not allow any
Black Skin power to rule over its Light Domain.
Hell cometh to the dumb, ignorant, educated
stupid "Worshippers of ONE", for Creation
is of OPPOSITES. Born Cubed I defy God of
ONE, for I have a Yes and No mentality
necessary for cubed intelligence -no Cyclopic
educator can allow. Obama must resign or
Doomsday,for only Light can rule over Earth.
No ONEistic god possesses Cubed Wisdom. "

Okay, so I will argue argue your link in round 4.

I thank my opponent. and encourage the audience to read the racist link.

Sources: http://timecube.com...
Debate Round No. 3
Frosty5794

Pro

It will be especially difficult for me to defend my resolution as my opponent has yet to make any arguements against it, and if they do so next speech, there is n possibility of me answering.

As Judges, you can only evaluate the clash between the two sides. There is yet to be any. If my opponent makes arguements next speech, I would love to hear them, but I have no opportunity to answer and therefore they cannot be evaluated.

So extend all my case, it has gone uncontested, therefore it is conceded to be true.

As for the remarks my opponent made against the racist links and tendencies of the website, this is a fact, and they have stated it. There has been no actual argument made (until possibly next round).

Even if the links are racist, they do not help the Con in their arguments, it doesn't disprove time cube theory.

So, case has gone conceded, and therefore true.

I eagerly await my opponent's response.
Koopin

Con

Thank you for posting your next argument.
In a way, this was a debate.

First of all, I am guessing this is a joke. If it is, I am unamused.

Okay, I will disprove your link in a few words.

This is a clip of your source.

"At the risk of my life, I must issue a GRAVE WARNING to my fellow Americans - about a
potential Civil War between millions if Obama,
the Black candidate, is elected President of the
United States, displacing the white president -
inducing America to become a Black Nation."

Obama has not tried to make America a black nation.

Resolution...negated.

I would also like to point out to the audience. My opponent has decided to use the link to debate for him. The link he provides has many curse words, is racist, and has many spelling errors. He loses the Spelling and conduct vote automatically.

Thank you for this debate.
Debate Round No. 4
34 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
nope, just $1,000
Posted by Sky_ace25 7 years ago
Sky_ace25
So Koopin you get your 10k yet?
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
Obviously MJFA is part of the evil worldwide conspiracy of lawyers. I don't buy it. Make that "double evil."
Posted by EHS_Debate 7 years ago
EHS_Debate
All points to CON, for obvious reasons.
Posted by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
Well, I debate against an argument instead of the title.

;)
Posted by J.Kenyon 7 years ago
J.Kenyon
Basically, in MIFA league, if the negative never contests an argument, it is considered that they have conceded it. Additionally, failure to debate the resolution results in a automatic loss.

I don't see how anyone could possibly give this to CON when he was clearly debating a resolution (you can win $10000 from Gene Ray for disproving Time Cube Theory) other than the one proposed (Time Cube Theory is true).
Posted by J.Kenyon 7 years ago
J.Kenyon
Right, the burden of proof is on PRO. All CON had to do was point it out and he would have won. He didn't, ergo he loses.

I did MIFA league policy debates. Even if a case is totally of the wall and clearly not prima facie, the negative team still has to at least point this out. You can't judge a winner based on arguments they never made. If the negative team never hits on a point, they lose.
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
Kenyon, Pro has the burden of proof, so if Pro does not provide proof, the resolution fails even if Con says absolutely nothing. If Pro says "lawn fairies exist" but provides no proof, the resolution fails without any opposing claims. The case is not prima facia.
Posted by J.Kenyon 7 years ago
J.Kenyon
Everything to PRO (except S/P) because CON failed to argue the resolution ("Time Cube Theory is true").
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
I cannot figure out if it is a joke or not. It could be a joke which some people take seriously. It does seem like somewhat "studied" gibberish, trying to exhaust a list of politically incorrect topics. I'll bet there is a research paper awaiting someone who can figure out the language pattern differences between real and fake nonsense.

If its a joke, Prof. Erwin Korey would be proud.
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by nickthengineer 7 years ago
nickthengineer
Frosty5794KoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Sky_ace25 7 years ago
Sky_ace25
Frosty5794KoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by EHS_Debate 7 years ago
EHS_Debate
Frosty5794KoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by snake 7 years ago
snake
Frosty5794KoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
Frosty5794KoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by J.Kenyon 7 years ago
J.Kenyon
Frosty5794KoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by Vi_Veri 7 years ago
Vi_Veri
Frosty5794KoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by omelet 7 years ago
omelet
Frosty5794KoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
Frosty5794KoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by GeorgeCarlinWorshipper 7 years ago
GeorgeCarlinWorshipper
Frosty5794KoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07