Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

How to answer source wankers?

smelisox
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2016 6:05:28 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

.... so you are stating that your general knowledge should be used as specific evidence, even though you admit that your general knowledge is not specific to the related evidence.

Some good answers to the question of "where did you get that information from" would be where you got that information from.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Axon85
Posts: 137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2016 9:30:43 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

I once read a study proving that 115% of people who get angry when asked to substantiate their arguments are actually slobbering idiots.
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2016 12:04:35 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

If some specific information is critical to your argument, then you should have a reliable source for it. If you don't have a source, then find some sourced info to use instead. If the information isn't crucial, don't present it in the first place.
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2016 1:15:46 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Providing sources is vital to giving weight to your arguments. If you make a claim you need to back it up. If you create a theory on your own, you still need to cite sources to explain how you arrived at your thesis.
Irascible_Me
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2016 1:18:21 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

There are things I know to my core, but which I cannot properly source, so I don't bother trying to debate them. That just isn't a winning proposition. If you don't cause the question, "Source?" you won't have to address it.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2016 3:02:26 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments.

If an argument doesn't rely on accurate information, why cite it?
If it does, why not ensure that it's current, and accurately obtained before citing it?

Do you live in a land with special respect for ignoramuses who lie eloquently, Smeli?

If so, mine has a few people I'd be glad to see exported there. :D
Jry2001
Posts: 45
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2016 3:28:28 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Without sources as a requirement, you would be able to make an argument based on flawed information. If there is legitimate doubt about the factual validity of a premise, then the other side should be able to use that to undermine your conclusion.
HeavenlyPanda
Posts: 819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2016 3:59:14 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/2/2016 9:30:43 PM, Axon85 wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

I once read a study proving that 115% of people who get angry when asked to substantiate their arguments are actually slobbering idiots.

Where is the source?
HeavenlyPanda. The most heavenly of all heavenly creatures.
smelisox
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2016 5:46:26 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/3/2016 3:59:14 AM, HeavenlyPanda wrote:
At 8/2/2016 9:30:43 PM, Axon85 wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

I once read a study proving that 115% of people who get angry when asked to substantiate their arguments are actually slobbering idiots.

Where is the source?

Literally already made that joke. On that exact comment.
Murdoc
Posts: 25
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2016 7:55:26 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Some people like to site lot of facts to build an argument so a lot of sourcing is required. If your arguments are more based on logical syllogisms you don't need so many sources and good voters will see that.
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.
Meh!
smelisox
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2016 3:55:58 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.

Got any sources Hitler isn't alive in Argentina? Exactly. But he isn't.
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2016 11:12:40 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/4/2016 3:55:58 PM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.

Got any sources Hitler isn't alive in Argentina? Exactly. But he isn't.

Got any sources he does? Exactly.
Meh!
smelisox
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 6:56:20 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/4/2016 11:12:40 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/4/2016 3:55:58 PM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.

Got any sources Hitler isn't alive in Argentina? Exactly. But he isn't.

Got any sources he does? Exactly.

I literally said "he isn't". What are you, stupid.
smelisox
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 6:56:38 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/5/2016 6:56:20 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/4/2016 11:12:40 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/4/2016 3:55:58 PM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.

Got any sources Hitler isn't alive in Argentina? Exactly. But he isn't.

Got any sources he does? Exactly.

I literally said "he isn't". What are you, stupid.

stupid?*
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 7:17:36 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/5/2016 6:56:38 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:20 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/4/2016 11:12:40 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/4/2016 3:55:58 PM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.

Got any sources Hitler isn't alive in Argentina? Exactly. But he isn't.

Got any sources he does? Exactly.

I literally said "he isn't". What are you, stupid.

stupid?*

No, but apparently you are c:
Meh!
smelisox
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 7:19:59 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/5/2016 7:17:36 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:38 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:20 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/4/2016 11:12:40 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/4/2016 3:55:58 PM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.

Got any sources Hitler isn't alive in Argentina? Exactly. But he isn't.

Got any sources he does? Exactly.

I literally said "he isn't". What are you, stupid.

stupid?*

No, but apparently you are c:

If you're not interested in contributing to the discussion, please leave.
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 7:22:55 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/5/2016 7:19:59 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:17:36 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:38 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:20 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/4/2016 11:12:40 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/4/2016 3:55:58 PM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.

Got any sources Hitler isn't alive in Argentina? Exactly. But he isn't.

Got any sources he does? Exactly.

I literally said "he isn't". What are you, stupid.

stupid?*

No, but apparently you are c:

If you're not interested in contributing to the discussion, please leave.

You can leave too then?
Meh!
smelisox
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 7:24:46 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/5/2016 7:22:55 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:19:59 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:17:36 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:38 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:20 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/4/2016 11:12:40 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/4/2016 3:55:58 PM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.

Got any sources Hitler isn't alive in Argentina? Exactly. But he isn't.

Got any sources he does? Exactly.

I literally said "he isn't". What are you, stupid.

stupid?*

No, but apparently you are c:

If you're not interested in contributing to the discussion, please leave.

You can leave too then?

Do you get pleasure out of derailing this thread, or out of being an arsehole?
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 7:25:32 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/5/2016 7:24:46 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:22:55 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:19:59 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:17:36 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:38 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:20 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/4/2016 11:12:40 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/4/2016 3:55:58 PM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.

Got any sources Hitler isn't alive in Argentina? Exactly. But he isn't.

Got any sources he does? Exactly.

I literally said "he isn't". What are you, stupid.

stupid?*

No, but apparently you are c:

If you're not interested in contributing to the discussion, please leave.

You can leave too then?

Do you get pleasure out of derailing this thread, or out of being an arsehole?

You do a good job at doing that yourself.
Meh!
smelisox
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 7:28:23 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/5/2016 7:25:32 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:24:46 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:22:55 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:19:59 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:17:36 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:38 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:20 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/4/2016 11:12:40 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/4/2016 3:55:58 PM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.

Got any sources Hitler isn't alive in Argentina? Exactly. But he isn't.

Got any sources he does? Exactly.

I literally said "he isn't". What are you, stupid.

stupid?*

No, but apparently you are c:

If you're not interested in contributing to the discussion, please leave.

You can leave too then?

Do you get pleasure out of derailing this thread, or out of being an arsehole?

You do a good job at doing that yourself.

I've asked you to stop, and you haven't. So no, this is on you.
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2016 7:30:10 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/5/2016 7:28:23 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:25:32 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:24:46 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:22:55 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:19:59 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 7:17:36 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:38 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/5/2016 6:56:20 AM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/4/2016 11:12:40 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/4/2016 3:55:58 PM, smelisox wrote:
At 8/3/2016 8:07:29 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 8/2/2016 5:00:10 PM, smelisox wrote:
Source wankers are wankers who ask for your source rather than listening for your arguments. It gets to ridiculous points, like "prove 16% of people in the world are Atheist". I'm not a full time sociologist, I don't have f#cking knowledge of all the tiny statistic, so if you ask for a source, it's your f#cking face. It's so ugly it's turned 16% of this planet into non-believers, since God could not create such an ugly creature.

What are some good answers to the idiotic debate question, "source?"

Have a source to back up your claims? It's not very difficult.

Got any sources Hitler isn't alive in Argentina? Exactly. But he isn't.

Got any sources he does? Exactly.

I literally said "he isn't". What are you, stupid.

stupid?*

No, but apparently you are c:

If you're not interested in contributing to the discussion, please leave.

You can leave too then?

Do you get pleasure out of derailing this thread, or out of being an arsehole?

You do a good job at doing that yourself.

I've asked you to stop, and you haven't. So no, this is on you.

If it makes you happy, bye.
Meh!