Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 166

Thread: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

  1. #81
    Andreius Pretorianus's Avatar Hastatas Posterior
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    756

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Topic: Israel vs Palestine
    Details: The Jews,came after 2000 years or so claiming that the palestine inhabited lands belonged to their great great(100 greats) uncles borthers from an second marriage ,so they decided to take it back.Were they right to wish their saint land back?or was this just a strategic movement?
    My position: I think it s more than an ethnic battle.It s a religios battle.The Jews came prepared not just to take back their so called saint land,but also to defeat the other islamic neighbours.

  2. #82
    Supai
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Aurora,Colorado
    Posts
    330

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Topic: Homosexual acts are immoral.
    Details: Are homosexual acts-specifically sodomy- immoral?
    My position: Affirmative.

  3. #83
    Boustrophedon's Avatar Grote Smurf
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Posts
    3,171

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Quote Originally Posted by Sterling View Post
    Topic: Homosexual acts are immoral.
    Details: Are homosexual acts-specifically sodomy- immoral?
    My position: Affirmative.
    Cool story, bro I think it's immoral and bigoted to judge people based on their sexual preference but whatever...

  4. #84
    Supai
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Aurora,Colorado
    Posts
    330

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    For the record if you have legitimate claim you should debate me and furthermore its not a judgement upon people rather a judgement on a practice or act.

  5. #85
    frozenprince's Avatar Civitate
    Content Staff

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    3,831

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Quote Originally Posted by Sterling View Post
    For the record if you have legitimate claim you should debate me and furthermore its not a judgement upon people rather a judgement on a practice or act.
    Know what, I suddenly feel a masochistic urge to "debate" you. Why not. I could use the excess of stress.

    Patronized by the mighty Heinz Guderian

  6. #86
    Sicknero's Avatar Princeps
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Istria
    Posts
    1,056

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Quote Originally Posted by Sterling View Post
    Topic: Homosexual acts are immoral.
    Details: Are homosexual acts-specifically sodomy- immoral?
    My position: Affirmative.
    Nvm. I see somebody has already accepted your challenge.
    Last edited by Sicknero; July 09, 2012 at 03:10 PM.
    "A quotation is a handy thing to have about, saving one the trouble of thinking for oneself ... always a laborious business." A. A. Milne

  7. #87
    Lazarus's Avatar Equites
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,607

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    "...And a duel on war, is it inevitiable and do we need it?"

    Proposed by The Norseman.

    I am of the affirmative opinion, that war is inevitable and there is sufficient possibility for it to be necessary. This challenge goes out to anyone willing to counter.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Brian de Bois-Guilbert View Post
    the Church has only improved mankind in history

    For this there are words, but none that abide by the ToS.

  8. #88
    total relism's Avatar Princeps Prior
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,396

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Topic title- Christianity vs Islam
    Details- Pretty much any topic that has to do with topic title.
    Position- Christianity
    creation vs evolution 1v1 debate offer in the fight club to anyone willing
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...=220827&page=3

    The first to present his case seems right,
    till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    Total War Middle - Earth! mod for Rome 2
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forum...-Earth-(TW-ME)

  9. #89
    Aquilifer
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    20 miles southwest of Boston, Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    322

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Topic title- Ancient army numbers
    Details- Are they exaggerated?
    Position- They're pretty reliable

    Last debates I had on this:

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=574224
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...=556728&page=6

  10. #90
    Center For Rationality's Avatar Sukauto
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Glasgow, Glasgow City, United Kingdom
    Posts
    63

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Topic Title: Dualism is true(philosophy of mind)
    Details- I am beast lol jk. Dualism is the position that more than one substance can exist.
    Position-Pro

  11. #91
    Equites Cohortales
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,623

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    I've got a few debates I'd be interested in having if there's anyone who will take the opposite side whether you agree with it or not as long as you can debate well I don't mind.

    Title: Morality, Secular vs. Religious
    Details: Which is more moral?
    Position: Secular

    Title: Evolution vs Creation
    Details: Which is truth?
    Position: Evolution

    Title: Capitalism vs Socialism
    Details: Which is better economic policy?
    Position: Socialism
    The greatest threat to Science is the illusion of knowledge.
    Political Profile | Justice on TWCenter | Elfdude's Guide to Evolution

  12. #92
    Legio_Italica's Avatar Lost in Limbo
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,954

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Quote Originally Posted by elfdude View Post
    I've got a few debates I'd be interested in having if there's anyone who will take the opposite side whether you agree with it or not as long as you can debate well I don't mind.

    Title: Morality, Secular vs. Religious
    Details: Which is more moral?
    Position: Secular

    Title: Evolution vs Creation
    Details: Which is truth?
    Position: Evolution

    Title: Capitalism vs Socialism
    Details: Which is better economic policy?
    Position: Socialism
    I would probably take you up on that last one, if you would be willing, and if you would synthesize what exactly you mean by "socialism" and "capitalism." My problem with a debate like that is that the sheer breadth and depth of the subject may make it impossible to discuss without very specific parameters.
    Last edited by Legio_Italica; February 05, 2013 at 04:08 PM.

  13. #93
    SomaaTheLion's Avatar Hastatus
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Cairo, Egypt
    Posts
    527

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Quote Originally Posted by total relism View Post
    Topic title- Christianity vs Islam
    Details- Pretty much any topic that has to do with topic title.
    Position- Christianity
    I would be glad to have this debate with you.
    We the willing, led by the unknowing are doing the impossible for the ungrateful, we have done so much for so long with so little, we are now qualified to do anything with nothing.

  14. #94
    planetpluto's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    61

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Title: Personal firearms (ie. firearms for personal use or self-defence) - should they be banned?
    Details: Just as the title suggests. However, I have a quirk about statistics and figures. If you are going to bring them to the debate, prepare to bring a link to the primary research article as well as a thorough understanding the of variables and methods used in the study (ie. actually read the study).
    Position: Pro personal firearms ban

  15. #95
    total relism's Avatar Princeps Prior
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,396

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Quote Originally Posted by SomaaTheLion View Post
    I would be glad to have this debate with you.

    I accept, i have pm you a few times, were are you?
    creation vs evolution 1v1 debate offer in the fight club to anyone willing
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...=220827&page=3

    The first to present his case seems right,
    till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    Total War Middle - Earth! mod for Rome 2
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forum...-Earth-(TW-ME)

  16. #96
    total relism's Avatar Princeps Prior
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,396

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Quote Originally Posted by elfdude View Post
    I've got a few debates I'd be interested in having if there's anyone who will take the opposite side whether you agree with it or not as long as you can debate well I don't mind.

    Title: Morality, Secular vs. Religious
    Details: Which is more moral?
    Position: Secular

    Title: Evolution vs Creation
    Details: Which is truth?
    Position: Evolution

    Title: Capitalism vs Socialism
    Details: Which is better economic policy?
    Position: Socialism


    I would do either of the first two.
    of course you already declined my offer before,maybe you have changed mind since than?
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...nge-here/page3
    creation vs evolution 1v1 debate offer in the fight club to anyone willing
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...=220827&page=3

    The first to present his case seems right,
    till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    Total War Middle - Earth! mod for Rome 2
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forum...-Earth-(TW-ME)

  17. #97
    Equites Cohortales
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,623

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Quote Originally Posted by total relism View Post
    I would do either of the first two.
    of course you already declined my offer before,maybe you have changed mind since than?
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...nge-here/page3
    This is entertaining. Make your post.

    Spoiler for pm information
    Quote Originally Posted by elfdude
    Quote Originally Posted by total relism
    Quote Originally Posted by elfdude
    Quote Originally Posted by total relism
    Quote Originally Posted by elfdude
    The Details of the challenge are fairly simple and straight forward. The name of the debate is creationism (christian inspired creationism) versus evolution. Your goal is, (if I'm clear) to prove that christian inspired creationism is not only a viable alternative to evolution but the best alternative to evolution. In order to do this you must post positive evidence for your own personal viewpoint and defeat the points brought up which contest them.

    The rules are simple:
    1. One post responses, you cannot make a new post until your previous post has been responded to. No double posting for any reason beyond forum glitches which moderators will remove.
    2. Every point in the post must be responded to directly, avoiding points will be taken defacto conceding the point.
    3. In order to respond to the point the point being responded to must be quoted and the response must follow
    4. All writing and work that is not your own must be cited and quoted appropriately, plagiarism is defacto conceding the point.
    5. First tier sources always trump secondary and tertiary sources, primary resources are resources which perform a study themselves, secondary resources supply an analysis of said study and tertiary sources are analysis of analysis. Sources are anything that is not provided through your own logic and train of thought. Contradiction between the same level of sources can only be resolved with in depth review of the sources themselves.
    6. Claims of fallacies must be explained including (not only a link but an explanation in your own words of why the logic is fallacious) a source explaining why they are indeed fallacies that is independent of the plaintiff. Off topic or irrelevant points are dismissed.
    7. Links to alternative websites, tiertiary sources and etc. are not a point. All points must be explained in your own words. If they are not they are conceded.
    8. Points cannot be reused, referring to your own posts at a future point in the debate is a nonpoint. If previous information is relevant to a new point brought up by the opponent the information must be re-explained appropriately dealing with the new context.
    9. Concepts you use must be defined, if a definition is requested you must define that in addition. Undefined or ambiguous concepts are not a point.
    10. If you cannot explain a study or understand the study yourself you cannot use it, expect to explain every source you use in your own words. If you cannot you defacto concede the point.
    11. Other than that these rules must be posted in the opening post.
    12. You have one opportunity to fix violations of the rules by altering your point so that is within the ruleset. If you repeatedly violate rules you concede the debate.
    13. All posts must be formatted regularly, bold, italic and underlined fonts are allowable, no size changes, color changes. Unclear formatting will result in a non point until you fix it, if you don't you concede the point. The burden is on the poster to ensure their post is readable.

    If you can agree with that we can begin in earnest. Feel free to start the first post.
    I agree to most, i do have a problem with number 8. I often find when i respond they sometimes are ignored, i hate to have to rewrite again response. Why not be able to say post so and so?
    Because you must re-explain the point, if a point is ignored you can say so but you must explain why you think it's ignored and how it is relevant. If you can't do that then you're not debating. There is no room for negotiation on this.

    Quote Originally Posted by total relism
    Also number 13, i have on a usb port things i have previous written as ready responses to certain things,sometimes when it comes over it id diffident font etc. Can that be changed in forum? if so how?. I know color but sometimes even trying to change font does not work.
    You are responsible for the formatting of your posts. This is a debate, not who can copy paste the most. If you must use something else you've typed, then you're responsible for retyping it plagiarism will be dismissed as a nonpoint.

    Quote Originally Posted by total relism
    I am busy right know with 3 other debates going on, so i ask that we wait to start the debate.
    So you're avoiding the debate now? You sure change your tune quick.

    Quote Originally Posted by total relism
    I would also ask that we limit to certain number of points etc I read your evolution post and well, there is alot there, anyone can post large amounts.
    I wrote every word in that post. So no, I do not intend to hold back to make it easier on you. It is your responsibility to read the post, digest it's meaning, and respond appropriately. You must explain this response.

    Quote Originally Posted by total relism
    Often just a few subjects points can give more than enough to discuss.
    You're welcome to keep to a few central points, however if you cannot deal with most of my points then you concede the argument. That's simply how it works. Otherwise this would not be a debate.

    Essentially the goal of this debate is to argue with your own knowledge and understanding, if you gain that knowledge from a source, you cite it, you do not post it at random, you do not copy paste from it, you summarize the point and why it is relevant. If you've decided to use some one else's synthesis of knowledge with no inherent understanding of your own then your point is a nonpoint because you cannot be reasonably expected to debate it due to your own ignorance. This is how a debate works. If you're not up to it then concede the point and move on.
    First i very much dislike the claim i change my tone, i am 100% into this debate, that is reason why i want to finish my other debates so i can pay attention 100%,as i like to with 1v1. Also about the amount, its not weather it is easier or not,its about time consumption and how much to debate, if their is to much material than the debate gets all over the place with multiple lines of thought/evidence going on any one subject. There is no way a full response could be fit into the space needed in one post. Our responses will end up being 3-4 hours each. The rest i can agree with.
    I don't really care what you like or dislike, you're the one who made the combative claim that I avoid debating with you. That is not the case. Now you're pulling a delay tactic for no apparent reason other than a hypothetical claim you're engaged in other debates. I would suggest you do not make a challenge or accept a challenge if you are not available to actually act on it. Do I believe there's a point to debating to you? No.

    It's quite obvious from reading the majority of your posts that you are incapable (or rather cannot be bothered) of understanding the science yourself and instead rely upon secondary sources from what you consider credible sources on different topics, because you cannot actually respond to the topics yourself you cannot begin to debate them or comprehend the opposition to your topic. This is what I seek to avoid because I'm not going to bother if you can't debate yourself. Case in point your debate about the age of the world in the fight club archives. It's quite obvious you have absolutely no scientific support but you can't understand what you're posting to even begin to comprehend your error. Because you rely on the words of others and not your own understanding there is no debate to be had, all it is is you posting your links, copying random quotes and otherwise using fallacy to make your point. When the explanations of your words are provided by others you reject them offhandedly as being wrong despite not possessing the real understanding to legitimately demonstrate this.

    As such those types of strategies are non strategies and if you engage in them with me I will consider your argument conceded due to your ignorance of the subject.

    As for the length of my evolution post, that is only scratching the surface of the amount of evidence I can bring to bear. There is literally hundreds if not thousands of pages I could write on the subject. Because there is a forum limit to the length of posts which I understand if you need to make a second post because you've hit such a limit I'll count it as one. Otherwise this debate will be exhaustive, cover a vast variety of topics and require a significant depth of understanding on your part. I am a med student, a professional debator and a politician, all I can say is good luck.
    Quote Originally Posted by total relism
    Quote Originally Posted by elfdude
    Quote Originally Posted by total relism
    Quote Originally Posted by elfdude
    Quote Originally Posted by total relism
    Quote Originally Posted by elfdude
    Quote Originally Posted by total relism
    one thing i was thinking was we must agree to add no more arguments/evidences to the case we make on op after the op has been made. The rest should be responding back and fourth on the stuff we already brought up on op's, agreed?.
    I've already said no to this. You've already asked. Make your post the rules are already outlined.
    so your saying we can bring in new info as arguments added on to op? do you wish to type alot or debate a subject?.
    Yes we can bring new information into the debate at will. We are debating the subject of evolution, it would be foolish to believe all of the evidence related to that could be posted in a single post.
    just wondering,have you ever seen such a debate in your life?you claim to be professorial debater, if so could you name me such a debate you have seen in academia anywhere?. A debate like that would never end,as their is always new info coming in and books apone books written already for evidence for creation and evolution. I can take this no other way than you not accepting a debate, how would you expect it to end?,from either side?. What if we were to have a page limit? than i may be ok with that.
    There's a good reason why the debate with evolution has ended with academia long ago. The evidence is simply overwhelming. No public or professional debate limits the information the debators can use, only the time they can spend on presenting that information. Since time is not a factor, with an online forum and these debates happen over the course of weeks such a limit would be inappropriate.

    As far as me avoiding a debate that is hilarious. Keep telling yourself that I couldn't care less. If you want to pretend I'm avoiding the debate feel free to do so. Like I've said, the only reason to hold back on making your OP is because you're lazy or you're ignorant. I am not limiting pages or points or information. I will debate the topic if you ever do actually make an OP.
    to me its no different than declining the debate. I am 1005 ok with having time limit as well say 3-4 weeks. I dont think you realized how long your debate would last.
    Can't make an OP I take it? Are you really that lazy? You've kept at it this for over two years, one would think a few hours spent making a post would be something you could do. Ohwell, I can't begin to say I'm surprised by your lack of will to debate.



    The fact of the matter is your resistance to debate because I will not agree to limit the points or information in the debate is going to be public knowledge. The reason for that will be obvious. Like I already said, I do not have an issue with being lazy. To me a long lasting or even potentially endless debate is a good thing.

    I will not limit the width or depth of information used in the debate.
    Last edited by elfdude; April 26, 2013 at 02:31 AM.
    The greatest threat to Science is the illusion of knowledge.
    Political Profile | Justice on TWCenter | Elfdude's Guide to Evolution

  18. #98
    total relism's Avatar Princeps Prior
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,396

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Quote Originally Posted by elfdude View Post
    This is entertaining. Make your post.

    please pm me with witch you wish to debate on first? or witch one, if creation vs evolution what subject,rules etc.

    read post 100

    also in his spoiler their has been some editing in the pm's,many some left out.


    the first few are accurate up until here and i will not replicate.Last accurate post


    he said
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    I don't really care what you like or dislike, you're the one who made the combative claim that I avoid debating with you. That is not the case. Now you're pulling a delay tactic for no apparent reason other than a hypothetical claim you're engaged in other debates. I would suggest you do not make a challenge or accept a challenge if you are not available to actually act on it. Do I believe there's a point to debating to you? No.

    It's quite obvious from reading the majority of your posts that you are incapable (or rather cannot be bothered) of understanding the science yourself and instead rely upon secondary sources from what you consider credible sources on different topics, because you cannot actually respond to the topics yourself you cannot begin to debate them or comprehend the opposition to your topic. This is what I seek to avoid because I'm not going to bother if you can't debate yourself. Case in point your debate about the age of the world in the fight club archives. It's quite obvious you have absolutely no scientific support but you can't understand what you're posting to even begin to comprehend your error. Because you rely on the words of others and not your own understanding there is no debate to be had, all it is is you posting your links, copying random quotes and otherwise using fallacy to make your point. When the explanations of your words are provided by others you reject them offhandedly as being wrong despite not possessing the real understanding to legitimately demonstrate this.

    As such those types of strategies are non strategies and if you engage in them with me I will consider your argument conceded due to your ignorance of the subject.

    As for the length of my evolution post, that is only scratching the surface of the amount of evidence I can bring to bear. There is literally hundreds if not thousands of pages I could write on the subject. Because there is a forum limit to the length of posts which I understand if you need to make a second post because you've hit such a limit I'll count it as one. Otherwise this debate will be exhaustive, cover a vast variety of topics and require a significant depth of understanding on your part. I am a med student, a professional debator and a politician, all I can say is good


    my missing response
    you have indeed avoided debating me creation vs evolution a few years back. I tried and you declined.


    you say
    " Now you're pulling a delay tactic for no apparent reason other than a hypothetical claim you're engaged in other debates. I would suggest you do not make a challenge or accept a challenge if you are not available to actually act on it"


    i am 100% wanting to act on it, usually when i set up 1v1 their is a week or two to time to set rules etc.

    you claim im in no other debate like i am somehow scared of your post,or that you bring something new that has never been seen before, i enjoy the confidence, but that does not equal truth. For debated i am curentley on.
    responding to common objections to bible

    http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...tions-to-bible
    Resting the green dragon/the dangers of radical environmentalism.

    http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...vironmentalism
    Jordan vs Bird who was better?
    https://www.2ksports.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=24


    you will see i post regularly on all these at same time, i also started these first so they have priority, when i asked to debate you its because i want to, that does not mean stop life and do it know forget all other posts.



    your second paragraphs should make you want to debate me,that means it should be easy and you can call me out on it. If you try to get out of this your name will remain on the refused to accept my debate offer in fight club.


    that is my whole point, we could both do pages and pages of stuff,than it really turns into who can type more and who has more time at hand. That is why i suggest we limit the topic to main areas to discuss every debate i have been in the op is the shortest, the responses get longer and longer and bring in new stuff, that is why i suggest smaller specific op's with no new stuff after op, only responses to op.


    i like this very much
    " I am a med student, a professional debator and a politician, all I can say is good luck."

    this does get me excited, i love overconfidence and, perhaps maybe someone who can respond to me?.




    his next
    I will not limit the points I use OP or non. That is not up for negotiation. I don't really care about the rest of this response as it's merely bluster.


    me
    than you should have no problem waiting,how many points do you plan to make?have you ever debated on forum were everything you post is responded to?do you not know how long it gets? they often come to nothing when not direct in debates. I am 100% ok with it i guess,but cant we agree on like 10 point each?instead of throwing books of material at each other?.




    me

    just letting you know i am starting to close down other threads.
    post 165
    i am getting ready for a 1v1 so tonight will likely be my last night posting on this thread.Maybe someone else can bring up the cause lol.
    http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...entalism/page6



    me
    one thing i was thinking was we must agree to add no more arguments/evidences to the case we make on op after the op has been made. The rest should be responding back and fourth on the stuff we already brought up on op's, agreed?.


    him
    Feel free, but I will be introducing new evidence and new points in every post. I will not limit my debate.


    me
    I was thinking, what about debating this?
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...e-to-Evolution

    debate title elfudes guide to evolution debate.



    me

    ok let me put it this way, will you debate me on the info you presented on your other threads op. With no new info?. I am trying to find reasonable debate to do with you that is not just points made/refuted add more etc etc I have done many of those.


    or maybe i noticed on your profile you said this
    Religious Attitude: Religion is the antithesis of evidence based logic and conceited in it's claim of truth. Against all faith based reasoning


    would you debate
    "evolution is is the antithesis of evidence based logic and conceited in it's claim of truth. Against all evolution based reasoning"



    him
    yes we can bring new information into the debate at will. We are debating the subject of evolution, it would be foolish to believe all of the evidence related to that could be posted in a single post.


    me
    so you wish to have a typing match, who can type more?. You trying to back out of a debate?


    me
    just wondering,have you ever seen such a debate in your life?you claim to be professorial debater, if so could you name me such a debate you have seen in academia anywhere?. A debate like that would never end,as their is always new info coming in and books apone books written already for evidence for creation and evolution. I can take this no other way than you not accepting a debate, how would you expect it to end?,from either side?. What if we were to have a page limit? than i may be ok with that.



    him


    This is hilarious. It seems like it is you trying to back out of the debate. The challenge was debating evolution, there's no possible way to bring up every relevant point to the debate in a single post. Thus the only person limiting the points to the OP would benefit is you. I'm not about to limit legitimate information because you're lazy. I will debate evolution, however I will do so while not recognizing this stupid rule. You accepted the challenge, you have accepted the rules. You can either create your OP bringing your points against evolution and why creationism is a better choice or you can back out of the debate. Why something as simple as not limiting the points would give you pause I'm not entirely sure, can't debate something on equal terms?


    me
    ok let me put it this way, will you debate me on the info you presented on your other threads op. With no new info?. I am trying to find reasonable debate to do with you that is not just points made/refuted add more etc etc I have done many of those.



    him
    The argument is cut and dry. Evolution vs Creationism. In order to defeat evolution you must not only detract from evolution, but also propose an alternate and attempt to support that alternate via the rules of debate, logic and reasoning. I've explained to you the rules under which such a debate will operate. If you are not satisfied with this, then you are more than welcome to avoid debating. If you don't debate it only says something about you, and like I said, the only two reasons to not debate are laziness or ignorance. Frankly I'm inclined to believe you suffer from the second one but then again, only by debating could you prove me wrong.

    Good luck.






    me
    tell me one debate that allows all the info for a subject to be presented?that debate would never end. I am 100% for equal terms,limited equal terms. Its not like a op on this forum cannot hit the major points to make a case for something.



    if it is ignorance on my part than why not just make all the great evidence that you have that no evolutionist in the world is aware of that can show it true or creation false?. I do not have all thetime in the world, this forum i use really only for 1v1. I have family,work,life. I do not live on a forum. i am 100% wanting and willing to debate anything you present, after all it is you that gets to put any info in op you want. The fact you dont feel you cant highlight major common evidence for evolution to me is amazing, have you ever even read a book [not even a debate] on evolution that presents all the evidence for evolution? no but they disuse certain subjects to varying degrees. That and i think its clear your unaware of how long responses get in a debate of this nature. If your willing to set a page limit than i am 100% ok with this.



    again,the reason i posted was to trey and limit/control the size/time of debate, that you assume it ignorance makes me wonder why not debate? since any info you put out i wont be able to respond to.why if its ignorance would the size matter? are you saying i am ignorant up until a certain amount of material?


    are you willing to set page limit/material presented limit?points made limit?



    him
    him
    There's a good reason why the debate with evolution has ended with academia long ago. The evidence is simply overwhelming. No public or professional debate limits the information the debators can use, only the time they can spend on presenting that information. Since time is not a factor, with an online forum and these debates happen over the course of weeks such a limit would be inappropriate.

    As far as me avoiding a debate that is hilarious. Keep telling yourself that I couldn't care less. If you want to pretend I'm avoiding the debate feel free to do so. Like I've said, the only reason to hold back on making your OP is because you're lazy or you're ignorant. I am not limiting pages or points or information. I will debate the topic if you ever do actually make an OP.



    me

    to me its no different than declining the debate. I am 100% ok with having time limit as well say 3-4 weeks. I dont think you realized how long your debate would last.
    Last edited by total relism; April 26, 2013 at 03:32 AM.
    creation vs evolution 1v1 debate offer in the fight club to anyone willing
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...=220827&page=3

    The first to present his case seems right,
    till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    Total War Middle - Earth! mod for Rome 2
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forum...-Earth-(TW-ME)

  19. #99
    Aquila Praefortis's Avatar Call me 'Aquila'.
    Content Staff Citizen

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Total War Center
    Posts
    1,195

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    Quote Originally Posted by planetpluto View Post
    Title: Personal firearms (ie. firearms for personal use or self-defence) - should they be banned?
    Details: Just as the title suggests. However, I have a quirk about statistics and figures. If you are going to bring them to the debate, prepare to bring a link to the primary research article as well as a thorough understanding the of variables and methods used in the study (ie. actually read the study).
    Position: Pro personal firearms ban
    Challenge accepted.

    My Position: pro right-to-carry firearms
    Last edited by Aquila Praefortis; April 25, 2013 at 04:36 PM.

  20. #100
    total relism's Avatar Princeps Prior
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,396

    Default Re: CHALLENGE THREAD -- Issue a challenge here

    just to let all know,elfude will not debate me creation vs evolution as he offered in fight club here
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...nge-here/page5


    just as he would not long ago
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...nge-here/page3


    unless besides his 13 or so "rules" that i would agree to. he would not allow any limiting of info, i asked if we could debate the subject of his thread on evolution [see his sig http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...e-to-Evolution] on this thread,he declined. I asked to debate his morality debate offer he declined. he says he will only debate if he can keep bringing in as much info/material as he wants throughout the debate, this would lead to a never ending debate for both sides and elephant hurling with no good discussion of points. I have offered any amount on op, his op here on this thread, and page limits to debate he rejected all. he wants to turn into who has more time/can type more instead of having a debate on points made. As far as his post on 101, it is simply a lie. I never said he could use any one aspect of evolution, he could use any he wants to.
    Last edited by total relism; April 26, 2013 at 03:40 AM.
    creation vs evolution 1v1 debate offer in the fight club to anyone willing
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...=220827&page=3

    The first to present his case seems right,
    till another comes forward and questions him -Proverbs 18.17

    Total War Middle - Earth! mod for Rome 2
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forum...-Earth-(TW-ME)

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •