The Instigator
frenchmoosetwo
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Koopin
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

koopin is online

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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 2 votes the winner is...
Koopin
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/14/2010 Category: Health
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,634 times Debate No: 12046
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (18)
Votes (2)

 

frenchmoosetwo

Pro

yes indeed he is.
Koopin

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for this opportunity to debate.

====================
DEFINITIONS

Solipsism: The philosophical theory that the self is all that you know to exist.

===================
ARGUMENT

You have the burden of proof, therefore you must prove that I am online.
Proving this is impossible, for many reasons.

Reason 1: Solipsism.
You can not even know that Koopin exists. You can only know that your mind does.

Reason 2: Drugs
Someone could have slipped drugs in every debate.org member's drink to make them think that there is a such user as Koopin. I mean, think about it. Do you really think some random boy would go around and say KFC all the time? What are the chances of that? It is almost like saying Justin Bieber is my sister.

Reason 3: This debate is going to be up until Debate.org shuts down. You must prove (if there is a Koopin) that I will always be online.

Thank you.

Sources:
(1). http://www.helium.com...
Debate Round No. 1
frenchmoosetwo

Pro

-"You have the burden of proof, therefore you must prove that I am online.
Proving this is impossible, for many reasons."-

-We shall see-

-"You can not even know that Koopin exists. You can only know that your mind does."-

-Yes i can proove that koopin exists through the evidence of what you just posted 3 lines above this statement, "...you must prove that I am online.".The debate title is "koopin is online" and in this statement you even say, " I", Meaning that you are koopin so koopin must exist if you are him.-

-"Someone could have slipped drugs in every debate.org member's drink to make them think that there is a such user as Koopin."-

-Even if someone did such a thing... how would YOU proove that this did in fact happen.-

-"I mean, think about it. Do you really think some random boy would go around and say KFC all the time?"-

-I would run out of the 8000 characters if i were to go around collecting and posting as evidence every single time you have posted the word "KFC". So yes i do belive this statement-

-"It is almost like saying Justin Bieber is my sister."-

-But, she is your sister[1] You even posted evidence supporting that fact that she was indeed your sister... you even WON!-

-"This debate is going to be up until Debate.org shuts down. You must prove (if there is a Koopin) that I will always be online."-

-There is a koopin[2] and he will always be online.. you must proove this wrong and to do this you must be online, but since you are koopin that would mean that koopin is online when you post that arguement. So while you are posting your arguements about koopin not being online there will be koopin online meaning your arguement about there being no koopin online would be false.-

-"Thank you."-

-your welcome-

sources:
[1] http://www.debate.org...
[2] http://www.debate.org...
Koopin

Con

Thank you for posting your next argument.

Throughout your whole argument you claim that since you have evidence, then you proved something. This is wrong. Evidence and proof are two different things. Even though I say "I" it still does not disprove solipsism. Your mind could be telling you that I said I. You must disprove the theory of Solipsism.

You are the one claiming I am always online, therefore you have the burden of proof and not I. So again I tell you, someone could have put drugs in your drink.

I know that you could find posts of me saying KFC, but you can not prove that these statements ere even made. Again, solipsism.

You use our debate about Justin Bieber as proof. It is not proof but evidence. Just because I won does not mean it is true.

Again, you have the burden of proof. You still have not proved that this site is even real, therefore you can not prove that I am even real.

I look forward to your argument.
Debate Round No. 2
frenchmoosetwo

Pro

frenchmoosetwo forfeited this round.
Koopin

Con

My opponent must not be online...

Argument extended.
Debate Round No. 3
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Rockylightning 6 years ago
Rockylightning
@Koopin

Sorry, I was polytheistic for a second...

Fake GOD. (Singular, not plural)
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
That argument still does not prove his case.
Posted by thatsbalone 6 years ago
thatsbalone
I assume "Koopin is online" means the status of the account "Koopin" is online...in which case Koopin could just set his/her status to "Away," "Busy," or "Offline" at any time...
Posted by frenchmoosetwo 6 years ago
frenchmoosetwo
if i wished to gain fame would i not want to win? i haz a streak to keep my friend.
Posted by brian_eggleston 6 years ago
brian_eggleston
I just googled Justin Bieber and it is a boy - some nauseating little tick from Canada - and he's not related to Koopin at all.

I said it before and I'll say it again - French Moose, you are charlatan, sir.
Posted by brian_eggleston 6 years ago
brian_eggleston
Isn't 'Justin' a boy's name?
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
@Rocky
Even though I could pray to fake gods. I don't.
Posted by CrysisPillar 6 years ago
CrysisPillar
koopin's real name in real life isn't Koopin, so you can't exactly say that someone named "Koopin" is online, because he's not ;)
Posted by Rockylightning 6 years ago
Rockylightning
Koopin, if you were bored there are many things adrenaline pumped teens your age can do that are fun.

Such as praying to false gods, mastu- nevermind...
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
Yeah wjm, that would have been a good one.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by tthansel 6 years ago
tthansel
frenchmoosetwoKoopinTied
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 Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
frenchmoosetwoKoopinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05