Debate.org: m93samman's Debates

I can disprove the 4-color map theorem

2011-02-11T17:45:30-08:00

(Post Voting Period) The four-color-map theorem, demonstrated here [1], is a theory that declares that "every possible geographical map can be colored with at most four colors in such a way that no two adjacent regions receive the same colour. Two regions are called adjacent if they share a border segment, not just a point." [2]

The rules for this debate are very simple.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1) In round one, my opponent will ONLY acce

Convince me a God has the right to punish and hurt people for their wrongs.

2010-12-21T00:04:32-08:00

(Post Voting Period) I would like to believe in a God. This would make my life much easier. But, besides my skepticism about the existence of a God, I can't seem to come to terms with the idea that a God would think it was ok to punish and hurt someone for their wrongs. I just cannot worship a being who hurts on purpose. Pro's job will be to convince me. My job will be to refute what Pro says. If I just don't agree and you think Pro's points are more valid vote Pro. If you think I have refuted well enough then vote Con. If Pro convinces me I myself will also vote Pro.

I will not contradict myself!

2011-04-06T18:10:03-08:00

(Voting Period) Resolved: I, Maruader, will not contradict myself. Rules: 1. CON must post 10 questions, directed at PRO, that could be answered with a 'yes' or 'no' or else CON loses. This does not apply to the final round. 2. PRO must respond to all questions posed by CON in some manner or else PRO loses. 3. If PRO's response does not give any opinion (e.g. "I don't know" or "I'm not sure"), then CON is entitled to another question next round. This is the only reason CON may post more than 10 questions. 4. PRO wins if he is found never to have contradicted himself. Likewise, CON wins if he can prove that PRO has contradicted himself. 5. Only statements made by PRO in rounds 2, 3, and 4 of this debate are subject to be examined for contradiction. No outside sources (my profile, previous debates, etc.) are applicable. Statements made by PRO in this debate not in direct response to any question posed by CON are still applicable. 6. Round 5 no more questions

Yo dawg, we heard you like rhymes...

2010-10-06T22:46:11-08:00

(Voting Period) My opponent doesn't matter, you just haven't got a hope, I'll violate you, you're a little kid and I'm the pope, Tear flow so hard you'll look like you've been smoking dope, Can you defeat me? The answer is always nope. Spastic rhymes, morals, I don't give a sh!t, Like Chris Brown to Rhianna, yes sir, I'm smashing it, Spitting words like an epileptic, Having a full-blown lyrical fit, Stop crying, you haven't even been hit. Thesaurus demon from the lowest pit. The words I speak are reality, Their force is just like gravity, My mind's pure depravity, There's no fight, your only choice is flee, You have no chance of beating me, Peep show, you want to come and see, I am just who you want to be, I have corrupted the whole dictionary, Bow before me, down on one knee, This lesson, I'm teaching it for free, Opening doors, I am a skeleton key. That's was just a taste, My words arrive with haste, I'm setting my own pace And winning every ra

President Obama's plan for increasing troops in Afghanistan is in the US' best interest

2010-01-28T15:18:10-08:00

(Post Voting Period) I'm gonna go ahead and post my case in round 1. Thanks to anyone who accepts; this'll be practice for both of us. I'm running con because this is now my personal final version. Good luck. Please, no personal attacks, and try to be grammatically and structurally clear. Thanks :) _____________________________________________________________________ "[Since the] invasion by Genghis Khan and his two-million strong Mongol hordes to the superpower proxy war between the United States and the Soviet Union, Afghanistan's trade routes and land-locked position have for centuries rendered it vulnerable to invasion. Although Afghanistan has endured successive waves of Persian, Greek, Arab, Turk, Mongol, British, and Soviet invaders, no occupying power has ever [been] successful. [I]t has been described as the "graveyard of empires," and unless America alters its approach, it risks meeting a similar fate. [END QUOTE] ^1 Because I agree that we face the risks outlined by

Morality is subjective

2010-12-28T01:31:45-08:00

(Post Voting Period) Come one and come all, Christmas Day will have begun by the time I finish posting this introductory round. In the following debate [1], my opponent agreed in the comments section to debate me on the objectivity/subjectivity of morality. Let's get things straightened out here; === CONTENT === o Definitions o Observations o Arguments o Sources ============= o Definitions Morality- conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct. [2] Subjective- [3] 1. existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought ( opposed to objective). 2. pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. Objective- [4] 1. being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject ( opposed to subjective). 2. of or pertaining to something that can be known, or to something that is an object or

The Miami Heat will win the NBA Finals.

2011-01-07T00:25:42-08:00

(Post Voting Period) The Miami Heat are one of the best teams in the league. They started off very slow and now are on a hot streak. The fact is they look like they have a good chance to win it all. Before going into detail, I await an opponent to accept my debate.

The Muslim God's existence is as unlikely as Zeus or Thor

2010-12-21T14:14:51-08:00

(Post Voting Period) m93samman suggested that he would accept my debate, the debate tiled "The Christian God's existence is as unlikely as Zeus or Thor". However someone else had accepted it. So, I am challenging him directly. My argument is the same: My argument is that the God of Judaism and Christianity, and Islam (Yahweh or Elohim or Allah) is as unlikely (or as likely) as any of the commonly accepted mythological gods of antiquity, such as Zeus or Thor or Odin. I am NOT arguing against the existence of a historical Jesus of Nazareth, however. I AM arguing about the God of the Jews, Christians and Muslims described in the Old and New testament and the Quran and the "Father" or perhaps "Holy spirit" aspect of the divinity in Christianity. I contend that there is zero scientific or historical evidence for the existence of Yahweh. I also contend that there is no reasonable reason to believe in the existence of Allah or Yahweh, over that of Zeus or Thor. We all consider

Israel is on the short end of the stick

2010-11-08T10:17:32-08:00

(Post Voting Period) The full resolution of the debate is "Israel has clearly violated human rights and is unjustified in its actions." Juvanya has been adamant in upholding zionist doctrines and beliefs on facebook, and, after several days, he has refused to change his beliefs. No one is really judging the debates, though. Maybe here, the voting will provide for some sort of metric by which we determine who wins. _____ Rules: _____ 1) Round 1 will have no argumentation whatsoever; if my opponent has any alternative or additional definitions he would like to add, he may do so. 2) Rounds 2 - 4 will be for argumentation. In the rounds of argumentation, there will be no ad hominems; all provided points of contention must have sources, but rebuttals do not require them, although they would be preferred if they are not strictly logic-based arguments. 3) Arguments are not temporally restrained, but when they regard history they MUST have multiple sources to back up the fac

This expression makes sense

2010-09-09T20:49:40-08:00

(Voting Period) I have, for the longest time, hated the expression "same difference". It makes absolutely no sense, and I think it really shows that English is extremely strange. In case my opponent decides to take this debate but hasn't heard the expression used, here's an example: Bob: I really don't want to read for the calculus exam.. Joe: You mean study? All it is is equations, you don't really read them. Bob: Same difference. Joe: THAT MAKES NO SENSE. Don't ever say that again. Bob: Haha yea it does... This is what it means: ~~~ We are basically going to continue this conversation, except it is not required to talk in the context of a calculus exam. I will be Joe. My opponent is Bob. Good luck to my opponent. By the way, this debate is just for fun. Have fun :)

Euthyphro Dilemma: Morality is arbritary

2010-06-05T07:09:00-08:00

(Voting Period) The Euthyphro Dilemma raises the following questions: "Is what is morally good, morally good because god commands it?" or "Is it because it is morally good, god commands it?" The two questions raises a "Dilemma," in that in situation number one, where what is morally good is morally good because god commands it, morality is arbitrary. Where as in situation number two, god commands because it is morally good, it raises the point that morality is separate from god. In order to say something is "morally good," we must first establish that there is something that separates good from bad. Once we establish this, this means that there is a moral law, which draws the line in between good and bad. Once we established that, we agree that there is a moral law giver, which instilled this moral law. Now if that law is given to us by god, it tells us that the moral law is arbitrary. This becomes a problem in which god can make anything morally good, as he pleases. He can m

Abortion

2011-10-17T22:00:50-08:00

(Voting Period) Abortion should be banned 1st Round stance... THen back and forth on debates...

Reality is what we perceive it to be.

2011-02-07T22:28:42-08:00

(Voting Period) My first debate topic that i want to discuss includes is that reality is what we perceive it to be.

The New Testament is Textually Reliable.

2011-01-14T00:57:09-08:00

(Voting Period) The New Testament text that we have is essentially the same as its original authorship. That is, we can be reasonably confident that the text we have is the same as the text that was written by the original author.

Definitions:
New Testament = 27 Books recognized by the Christian Church
Essentially the Same = The content of the text conveys the same message and content as the original author intended

Out of Bounds:
The truth of what the documents claim. We are not debating the theology of the documents, rather the actual textual reliability of the documents.
Translations. Some translations are good, some are bad. Lets not get stuck on a given translation being inaccurate.
The first round shall be for accepting the debate. I will make my opening argument in round 2, as will my opponent. Round 3 will be for rebuttals (New Arguments Allowed). Round 4 will be for responses to those

A Debate on Time

2010-12-18T17:48:42-08:00

(Voting Period) Here's how this debate will work: In Round 1, CON will choose to argue either that time is finite or that time is infinite. In Round 2 through 5, PRO will attempt to prove that my opponent's chosen argument is logically impossible. Whether or not CON can prove the other possibility to be impossible is irrelevant to this debate; if both debaters prove the concept that their opponent defends impossible, the debate defaults to PRO. In balance, if neither debater can prove their opponent's concept to be false, CON wins. Finally, good luck, m9samman, and may this debate be worthy of the front page.

Affirmative Action

2010-12-13T09:42:18-08:00

(Voting Period) I would like to give a sincere thanks to my opponent for accepting this important, and certainly relevent debate. My arguments will be to prove that Affirmative Action is a racist practice, and is detrimental to our country. I will make no arguments in my first round, so I would appreciate it, if my opponent would also stick to introductions, and definitions. Thanks again to my opponent, and to the readers for your time and consideration. On with the debate.

Did m93samman vote fairly ?

2010-12-08T08:46:09-08:00

(Voting Period) In this debate: http://www.debate.org/debates/I-am-Koopin/2/ My opponent has given 3 points to ethopia619 for who "made the more convincing arguments". Now ethopia619 did an amazing job (he produced a great combination of effort and humor) and I can't wait to have other debates with him. However it was obvious that he did not make more convincing arguments and that is not simply my opinion. Many great assertions I made indeed but I will only support them in the second round due to time and some unfinished school work. Now my opponent may introduce himself and make his own arguments though I suspect this debate will revolve heavily on the validity of my arguments. Anyhow please accept, VAntras

The resolution is "IT" is a good thing

2010-12-06T10:41:30-08:00

(Post Voting Period) Rules 1) Both sides have a burden of proof, they must argue their claims 2) No definitions of "IT" allowed 3) No links what so ever allowed Pro will argue that "IT" is a good thing Con will argue that "IT" is a bad thing My opening argument 1) Something that is good is not bad 2) "IT" is not bad 3) Therefore "IT" is good

Impromptu Debate

2010-11-30T12:06:46-08:00

(Post Voting Period) Greetings all, This is an Impromptu Debate. Each participant has ten minutes to post, so please keep that in mind when judging for errors or discrepancies in spelling. There are three rounds in this debate, but only the third round will be utilized for the actual debate. In the first round, my opponent will join and merely post formalities. In the second round, I will post three different topics that my opponent can debate. My opponent will do the same. In the third round, each will select one topic and argue for or against it. Do not attempt to refute the opponent, as this is based upon who is the most professional when under time restrictions. Also, it is generally considered sportsmanlike if the opponent does no research or outline planning about the topic during the ten minutes that I post. Of course, this 'rule' only works if both parties concur and abide by, "The Honour System" Good luck and have fun!

9-11 was not a Muslim happy-hour

2010-11-16T07:37:12-08:00

(Post Voting Period) Somewhere in the abyss that is Debate.org, Ste93 made an outlandish claim, stating that 9-11 was a day of celebration for Muslims around the world because they believed the terrorists were going to heaven, and that the Muslims would be following them. I thank Ste93 for accepting this debate, and hope he will live up to the expectations I have of him for this debate. To begin, I'm going to lay down the framework for the debate. ---Content--- o Rules o Definitions o Paper Toss o Sources --------------- o Rules The rules are going to be simple. We are going to have, from the second half of Round 1 on, a civil debate that involves, clearly, the Islamic faith, and their beliefs on what Ste93 believes is apparent martyrdom. I have just three rules. 1) All references to the Qura'an, Hadith, or otherwise must be accurately cited. 2) No arguments from semantics should be made. 3) All the definitions I provide are not debated. o Definitions