Total Posts:57|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Big problem with this site

izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 10:50:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"You did not address his arguments, that means you concede them. That is how debate works. "

cerebral_narcissist

This idiot clearly doesn't know how debates work. Imagine the implications of this really being the way debate works. That would mean the pro could just throw as many arguments out as the text allows. Rebuttals always take more words so they would win by default. This doesn't give the con any chance to present his own arguments. As a person who is witness to a debate, you are suppose to weigh the merits of the argument independent of the rebuttals. A person could place their own arguments and never address the opponents. This would be plain retarded to believe both people conceded the others points. It would mean both people argued and left it up to the person listening to evaluate who made the stronger arguments. This belief about how debate works needs to stop, its simply retarded, but then again consider the source.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 10:52:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/25/2011 10:51:06 PM, Rockylightning wrote:
Ignore this thread.

certainly wouldn't want people to learn how to vote on debates, and to learn about the implications of their incorrect views. Learning is bad.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 11:05:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Who likes guavas?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 11:10:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I completely agree... I have opponents throw like 20 arguments at me... Some good, some not

I try to address all the main points... But, I dont have space to respond to their stupid arguments...
President of DDO
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 11:27:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/25/2011 10:50:24 PM, izbo10 wrote:
This idiot clearly doesn't know how debates work. Imagine the implications of this really being the way debate works. That would mean the pro could just throw as many arguments out as the text allows. Rebuttals always take more words so they would win by default. This doesn't give the con any chance to present his own arguments. As a person who is witness to a debate, you are suppose to weigh the merits of the argument independent of the rebuttals. A person could place their own arguments and never address the opponents. This would be plain retarded to believe both people conceded the others points. It would mean both people argued and left it up to the person listening to evaluate who made the stronger arguments. This belief about how debate works needs to stop, its simply retarded, but then again consider the source.

Oh God, Izbo with his 5-17 debate record trying to tell us how debates work.

Yes Izbo, concessions do need to be addressed or they are conceded. There is some disagreement as to how far this goes but I personally say that as long as there is some hint of logic to the conclusion, the argument stands until refuted.

Debating is not a speech contest. It is a contest between two participants to see who can make the stronger arguments. You can not prove your argument is stronger then your opponents if you do not challenge it. Sitting back and calling your opponent's argument stupid (something you are famous for) does not demonstrate that you understand their argument let alone have the stronger one.

Your problem is that you expect the voters to agree with you and then wonder why no one votes for you. Having a stronger argument is one thing, presenting the stronger argument is another, and one in which you completely fail at.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 11:32:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/25/2011 11:27:59 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 10:50:24 PM, izbo10 wrote:
This idiot clearly doesn't know how debates work. Imagine the implications of this really being the way debate works. That would mean the pro could just throw as many arguments out as the text allows. Rebuttals always take more words so they would win by default. This doesn't give the con any chance to present his own arguments. As a person who is witness to a debate, you are suppose to weigh the merits of the argument independent of the rebuttals. A person could place their own arguments and never address the opponents. This would be plain retarded to believe both people conceded the others points. It would mean both people argued and left it up to the person listening to evaluate who made the stronger arguments. This belief about how debate works needs to stop, its simply retarded, but then again consider the source.

Oh God, Izbo with his 5-17 debate record trying to tell us how debates work.

Yes Izbo, concessions do need to be addressed or they are conceded. There is some disagreement as to how far this goes but I personally say that as long as there is some hint of logic to the conclusion, the argument stands until refuted.

Debating is not a speech contest. It is a contest between two participants to see who can make the stronger arguments. You can not prove your argument is stronger then your opponents if you do not challenge it. Sitting back and calling your opponent's argument stupid (something you are famous for) does not demonstrate that you understand their argument let alone have the stronger one.

Your problem is that you expect the voters to agree with you and then wonder why no one votes for you. Having a stronger argument is one thing, presenting the stronger argument is another, and one in which you completely fail at.

Yes, I completely fail, because I refuse to dumb down my arguments to the lowest common denominator or in other words the utter stupidity of the masses on this site. We will never have a good site here as long as the average voter is 15 or has the mental capacity of a 2 year old cerebrals case.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 11:35:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/25/2011 11:32:25 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:27:59 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 10:50:24 PM, izbo10 wrote:
This idiot clearly doesn't know how debates work. Imagine the implications of this really being the way debate works. That would mean the pro could just throw as many arguments out as the text allows. Rebuttals always take more words so they would win by default. This doesn't give the con any chance to present his own arguments. As a person who is witness to a debate, you are suppose to weigh the merits of the argument independent of the rebuttals. A person could place their own arguments and never address the opponents. This would be plain retarded to believe both people conceded the others points. It would mean both people argued and left it up to the person listening to evaluate who made the stronger arguments. This belief about how debate works needs to stop, its simply retarded, but then again consider the source.

Oh God, Izbo with his 5-17 debate record trying to tell us how debates work.

Yes Izbo, concessions do need to be addressed or they are conceded. There is some disagreement as to how far this goes but I personally say that as long as there is some hint of logic to the conclusion, the argument stands until refuted.

Debating is not a speech contest. It is a contest between two participants to see who can make the stronger arguments. You can not prove your argument is stronger then your opponents if you do not challenge it. Sitting back and calling your opponent's argument stupid (something you are famous for) does not demonstrate that you understand their argument let alone have the stronger one.

Your problem is that you expect the voters to agree with you and then wonder why no one votes for you. Having a stronger argument is one thing, presenting the stronger argument is another, and one in which you completely fail at.

Yes, I completely fail, because I refuse to dumb down my arguments to the lowest common denominator or in other words the utter stupidity of the masses on this site. We will never have a good site here as long as the average voter is 15 or has the mental capacity of a 2 year old cerebrals case.

Plus double r, i have never credited you as being smart, but you seemed to fail to address the point about it leading to a situation where a pro could argument bomb, ala william lane craig, and win by default. This is not how debate works, since you failed to address that, should I take it as a concession.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 11:43:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/25/2011 11:35:12 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Plus double r, i have never credited you as being smart, but you seemed to fail to address the point about it leading to a situation where a pro could argument bomb, ala william lane craig, and win by default. This is not how debate works, since you failed to address that, should I take it as a concession.

This is not a debate genius, this is a forum. It is very easy to address that, just call your opponent out for the fallacy of shotgun argumentation and refute as many points as space will allow. I have done this and it works fine. This is because of something you know very little about... It's called communication, and it is very important in debating.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 11:51:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/25/2011 11:43:04 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:35:12 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Plus double r, i have never credited you as being smart, but you seemed to fail to address the point about it leading to a situation where a pro could argument bomb, ala william lane craig, and win by default. This is not how debate works, since you failed to address that, should I take it as a concession.

This is not a debate genius, this is a forum. It is very easy to address that, just call your opponent out for the fallacy of shotgun argumentation and refute as many points as space will allow. I have done this and it works fine. This is because of something you know very little about... It's called communication, and it is very important in debating.

oh so debate works this way until you say it doesn't, I see.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 12:03:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
wow, I just figured out the problem here, people like cerebral and double r mistake high school debate team for real world debate. They don't think the actual truth is important, being in high school debate you are handed a position to defend and you defend independent of your actual position. At that point, the only thing left to vote on is the styling of the argument. Once people get out into the real world of debate, then the person is actually defending their position. As a voter, we are then allowed to take into account the actual arguments. The difference is in high school the person may not be defending a position they believe, so it would be unfair for them to be voted on for having arguments that you know they know don't work, it may be all they have to work with. Where as in the real world, if thats all the person has is poor arguments they don't all need to be addressed if the audience knows they are bad arguments that is good enough. The actual point of an intellectual debate is for the audience to get closer to the truth.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 12:04:38 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Gosh, Izbo10's idiocy is supreme.

That's all I have to say for now...since I have lost much interest to fight Izbo10 and his childish games in the forums' threads.
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 12:10:51 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/25/2011 11:51:20 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:43:04 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:35:12 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Plus double r, i have never credited you as being smart, but you seemed to fail to address the point about it leading to a situation where a pro could argument bomb, ala william lane craig, and win by default. This is not how debate works, since you failed to address that, should I take it as a concession.

This is not a debate genius, this is a forum. It is very easy to address that, just call your opponent out for the fallacy of shotgun argumentation and refute as many points as space will allow. I have done this and it works fine. This is because of something you know very little about... It's called communication, and it is very important in debating.


oh so debate works this way until you say it doesn't, I see.

Failure to respond to an argument because of shotgun argumentation is completely different from failure to respond because you choose not to. What cerebral was talking about is the latter, which is not what you were compaining about. Please try to keep up.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 12:13:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/26/2011 12:10:51 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:51:20 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:43:04 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:35:12 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Plus double r, i have never credited you as being smart, but you seemed to fail to address the point about it leading to a situation where a pro could argument bomb, ala william lane craig, and win by default. This is not how debate works, since you failed to address that, should I take it as a concession.

This is not a debate genius, this is a forum. It is very easy to address that, just call your opponent out for the fallacy of shotgun argumentation and refute as many points as space will allow. I have done this and it works fine. This is because of something you know very little about... It's called communication, and it is very important in debating.


oh so debate works this way until you say it doesn't, I see.

Failure to respond to an argument because of shotgun argumentation is completely different from failure to respond because you choose not to. What cerebral was talking about is the latter, which is not what you were compaining about. Please try to keep up.

What cerebral was actually referring to is a red herring arugment in a debate, that i clearly called out as such and explained, unless of course you are stupid enough to think that asking:

Where does izboe10 think his morality came from?

or where does izbo10 think induction came from?

Are arguments for the biblical god. So to say the cerebral had a clue what he is talking about is to show that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 12:24:58 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/26/2011 12:13:56 AM, izbo10 wrote:
What cerebral was actually referring to is a red herring arugment in a debate, that i clearly called out as such and explained, unless of course you are stupid enough to think that asking:

Where does izboe10 think his morality came from?

or where does izbo10 think induction came from?

Are arguments for the biblical god. So to say the cerebral had a clue what he is talking about is to show that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

This is your thread genious. I have no idea what debate you are refering to nor do I care to hear your opinions about your previous debates. If you had a specific case in mind you should have referenced it. Without that, your thread is apparently attacking the general concept of concessions. We are not mind readers, that is why communication is important. We'll just chalk this up to the latest example of how you fail at it.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 6:28:35 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/25/2011 10:50:24 PM, izbo10 wrote:
"You did not address his arguments, that means you concede them. That is how debate works. "

cerebral_narcissist

This idiot clearly doesn't know how debates work. Imagine the implications of this really being the way debate works. That would mean the pro could just throw as many arguments out as the text allows. Rebuttals always take more words so they would win by default. This doesn't give the con any chance to present his own arguments. As a person who is witness to a debate, you are suppose to weigh the merits of the argument independent of the rebuttals. A person could place their own arguments and never address the opponents. This would be plain retarded to believe both people conceded the others points. It would mean both people argued and left it up to the person listening to evaluate who made the stronger arguments. This belief about how debate works needs to stop, its simply retarded, but then again consider the source.

You abject, snivelling, spineless piece of sh1t retard.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 6:31:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/26/2011 12:24:58 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/26/2011 12:13:56 AM, izbo10 wrote:
What cerebral was actually referring to is a red herring arugment in a debate, that i clearly called out as such and explained, unless of course you are stupid enough to think that asking:

Where does izboe10 think his morality came from?

or where does izbo10 think induction came from?

Are arguments for the biblical god. So to say the cerebral had a clue what he is talking about is to show that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

This is your thread genious. I have no idea what debate you are refering to nor do I care to hear your opinions about your previous debates. If you had a specific case in mind you should have referenced it. Without that, your thread is apparently attacking the general concept of concessions. We are not mind readers, that is why communication is important. We'll just chalk this up to the latest example of how you fail at it.

For the record I have no idea what thread or debate he is talking about either, the retard can't even spell his screen name.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 6:43:04 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/26/2011 12:10:51 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:51:20 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:43:04 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:35:12 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Plus double r, i have never credited you as being smart, but you seemed to fail to address the point about it leading to a situation where a pro could argument bomb, ala william lane craig, and win by default. This is not how debate works, since you failed to address that, should I take it as a concession.

This is not a debate genius, this is a forum. It is very easy to address that, just call your opponent out for the fallacy of shotgun argumentation and refute as many points as space will allow. I have done this and it works fine. This is because of something you know very little about... It's called communication, and it is very important in debating.


oh so debate works this way until you say it doesn't, I see.

Failure to respond to an argument because of shotgun argumentation is completely different from failure to respond because you choose not to. What cerebral was talking about is the latter, which is not what you were compaining about. Please try to keep up.

Thank you, this is another example of him twisting context.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 7:18:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/26/2011 6:43:04 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/26/2011 12:10:51 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:51:20 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:43:04 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:35:12 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Plus double r, i have never credited you as being smart, but you seemed to fail to address the point about it leading to a situation where a pro could argument bomb, ala william lane craig, and win by default. This is not how debate works, since you failed to address that, should I take it as a concession.

This is not a debate genius, this is a forum. It is very easy to address that, just call your opponent out for the fallacy of shotgun argumentation and refute as many points as space will allow. I have done this and it works fine. This is because of something you know very little about... It's called communication, and it is very important in debating.


oh so debate works this way until you say it doesn't, I see.

Failure to respond to an argument because of shotgun argumentation is completely different from failure to respond because you choose not to. What cerebral was talking about is the latter, which is not what you were compaining about. Please try to keep up.

Thank you, this is another example of him twisting context.

A debater may chose not to respond to an argument figuring the argument is not worth wasting their time on and they have a different argument. It is then up to the audience to say, is that argument valid. If it is, then you take it into consideration. If it is not you don't give the guy who presented it credit despite knowing it isn't valid.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 7:51:06 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/26/2011 7:18:53 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/26/2011 6:43:04 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/26/2011 12:10:51 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:51:20 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:43:04 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:35:12 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Plus double r, i have never credited you as being smart, but you seemed to fail to address the point about it leading to a situation where a pro could argument bomb, ala william lane craig, and win by default. This is not how debate works, since you failed to address that, should I take it as a concession.

This is not a debate genius, this is a forum. It is very easy to address that, just call your opponent out for the fallacy of shotgun argumentation and refute as many points as space will allow. I have done this and it works fine. This is because of something you know very little about... It's called communication, and it is very important in debating.


oh so debate works this way until you say it doesn't, I see.

Failure to respond to an argument because of shotgun argumentation is completely different from failure to respond because you choose not to. What cerebral was talking about is the latter, which is not what you were compaining about. Please try to keep up.

Thank you, this is another example of him twisting context.

A debater may chose not to respond to an argument figuring the argument is not worth wasting their time on and they have a different argument. It is then up to the audience to say, is that argument valid. If it is, then you take it into consideration. If it is not you don't give the guy who presented it credit despite knowing it isn't valid.

You seem to have some sort of issue with me, in which case PM me or challenge me to a debate. Don't get me wrong I am amused by this constant campaign against me because I know what motivates you, but everyone else is bored.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 7:58:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/26/2011 7:51:06 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/26/2011 7:18:53 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/26/2011 6:43:04 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/26/2011 12:10:51 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:51:20 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:43:04 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:35:12 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Plus double r, i have never credited you as being smart, but you seemed to fail to address the point about it leading to a situation where a pro could argument bomb, ala william lane craig, and win by default. This is not how debate works, since you failed to address that, should I take it as a concession.

This is not a debate genius, this is a forum. It is very easy to address that, just call your opponent out for the fallacy of shotgun argumentation and refute as many points as space will allow. I have done this and it works fine. This is because of something you know very little about... It's called communication, and it is very important in debating.


oh so debate works this way until you say it doesn't, I see.

Failure to respond to an argument because of shotgun argumentation is completely different from failure to respond because you choose not to. What cerebral was talking about is the latter, which is not what you were compaining about. Please try to keep up.

Thank you, this is another example of him twisting context.

A debater may chose not to respond to an argument figuring the argument is not worth wasting their time on and they have a different argument. It is then up to the audience to say, is that argument valid. If it is, then you take it into consideration. If it is not you don't give the guy who presented it credit despite knowing it isn't valid.

You seem to have some sort of issue with me, in which case PM me or challenge me to a debate. Don't get me wrong I am amused by this constant campaign against me because I know what motivates you, but everyone else is bored.

I have an issue with stupidity and you certainly qualify. You can't even understand the basic concept of debate. I mean seriously so far things you fail to understand or comprehend: How to debate, murder is wrong, and humans strive to survive. That qualifies as stupid and not many on this board can top that on the stupid list.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 8:06:01 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/26/2011 7:58:03 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/26/2011 7:51:06 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/26/2011 7:18:53 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/26/2011 6:43:04 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/26/2011 12:10:51 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:51:20 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:43:04 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:35:12 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Plus double r, i have never credited you as being smart, but you seemed to fail to address the point about it leading to a situation where a pro could argument bomb, ala william lane craig, and win by default. This is not how debate works, since you failed to address that, should I take it as a concession.

This is not a debate genius, this is a forum. It is very easy to address that, just call your opponent out for the fallacy of shotgun argumentation and refute as many points as space will allow. I have done this and it works fine. This is because of something you know very little about... It's called communication, and it is very important in debating.


oh so debate works this way until you say it doesn't, I see.

Failure to respond to an argument because of shotgun argumentation is completely different from failure to respond because you choose not to. What cerebral was talking about is the latter, which is not what you were compaining about. Please try to keep up.

Thank you, this is another example of him twisting context.

A debater may chose not to respond to an argument figuring the argument is not worth wasting their time on and they have a different argument. It is then up to the audience to say, is that argument valid. If it is, then you take it into consideration. If it is not you don't give the guy who presented it credit despite knowing it isn't valid.

You seem to have some sort of issue with me, in which case PM me or challenge me to a debate. Don't get me wrong I am amused by this constant campaign against me because I know what motivates you, but everyone else is bored.

I have an issue with stupidity and you certainly qualify.

It's easy for a failing student to call his teacher stupid.

You can't even understand the basic concept of debate. I mean seriously so far things you fail to understand or comprehend: How to debate,

Does anyone agree with your conception of what debate is? Can you offer any valid sources that support your conception of what debate is? No to both.

murder is wrong,

No I 'fail' to understand that murder even exists objectively. You with your superior mind and education have yet to make this case.

and humans strive to survive.

At no point have I expressed any opinion on that.

That qualifies as stupid and not many on this board can top that on the stupid list.

Well I don't know about that,

Atheists can't use inductive reasoning, atheists can't talk about morality, I don't know what objectivity means, my moral system contains no 'oughts', if everyone agrees that makes it objective. All your opinions and all far more retarded than anything I have said.

Lastly why are we still 'arguing' over old arguments. Each dispute we have had has spawned about half a dozen threads in which you have been soundly defeated. Why do you continue to troll me... oh because I continue to respond...

It almost seems as though we are in a relationship, you are the masochist and I am the sadist. Is that healthy?

Anyway, PM me or debate me.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 8:08:41 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Atheists can't use inductive reasoning, atheists can't talk about morality.

Wow just wow are you brain dead, I say atheist can do both and you are the one that holds a position that you can't defend your morality as you claim you have no grounds for it.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 8:10:14 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/25/2011 11:51:20 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:43:04 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 9/25/2011 11:35:12 PM, izbo10 wrote:
Plus double r, i have never credited you as being smart, but you seemed to fail to address the point about it leading to a situation where a pro could argument bomb, ala william lane craig, and win by default. This is not how debate works, since you failed to address that, should I take it as a concession.

This is not a debate genius, this is a forum. It is very easy to address that, just call your opponent out for the fallacy of shotgun argumentation and refute as many points as space will allow. I have done this and it works fine. This is because of something you know very little about... It's called communication, and it is very important in debating.


oh so debate works this way until you say it doesn't, I see.

Show me any comment that leads you to this. This shows you have no fuckin clue of my points. Maybe you just don't understand that I am making the arguments from you viewpoint. Not my actual beliefs. But that may be where the problem comes in, you can show arguments against the others views that make it ridiculous.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 8:12:34 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/26/2011 8:08:41 AM, izbo10 wrote:
Atheists can't use inductive reasoning, atheists can't talk about morality.

Wow just wow are you brain dead, I say atheist can do both and you are the one that holds a position that you can't defend your morality as you claim you have no grounds for it.

This is your expressed opinion, I repeatedly challenged, mocked and trolled you for it and you never rose to the challenge.

What position do I hold that I can't defend? How can I not defend my morality? Why do you bother making these statements that you know will provoke me into a response when you have no interest in what I say?

Challenge me to a debate.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
headphonegut
Posts: 4,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 8:15:07 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
talk about being hard for C_N i didn't know you had a fan base C_N.

it's ok izbo nobody cares if you're gay it's 21st century america one might assume that you're republican or rather a social conservative.
crying to soldiers coming home to their dogs why do I torment myself with these videos?
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 8:16:46 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/26/2011 8:15:07 AM, headphonegut wrote:
talk about being hard for C_N i didn't know you had a fan base C_N.

I have a certain subtle allure.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2011 8:22:35 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
The temptation is to actually try and explain to Izbo the nature of resolution in a debate, and how pro has the obligation to prove, and con merely has the obligation to nullify the assertions of pro. However, it has been my experience that trying to explain something, even as elementary as that is as futile as explaining algebra to a sparrow. Actually a sparrow won't end up calling you an f-ing retard.