I did read the entire post. Yes it's both of our responsibilities SINCE WERE BOTH ARGUING IT. I think it does have a basis.
That's not how debate works. I have a point I'm trying to make, you have a point you're trying to make, and we both supply supporting arguments to our *own* arguments. You haven't provided *anything* to support your argument at all that can be considered viable corroborative evidence. In other words, your debate technique is terrible and I don't think you understand how badly you've already lost, and are continuing to lose.
why would you post that then if none of them were around when Jesus was born? So for that it'd be a waste of time to go to the link.
I'll quote you:
The Roman king who sentenced Jesus Christ's death was Catholic or Christian google it.
Roman King - your words. Since there were no Roman Kings when Jesus was executed, this statement is *completely wrong*.
Suggesting isn't exactly knowing is it.
So do we have to ressurect the guh & ask him? It's better evidence then anything you've put on the table - and it's a PRO-religion website to boot - they're on *your* side. If you want to slander the argument or intelligence of people fighting *for* religion, I won't stop you. I think you're crazy for discrediting your own argument, but hell, I think it's funny.
[/quote]I think you're crazy for discrediting your own argument, but hell, I think it's funny.
Isn't it you discrediting your own arguement if you brought up a website that says what I said it true?
Since there were no Roman Kings when Jesus was executed
Ok whatever the leader was called is what I meant to name him. (If their was no kings when Jesus was born I meant the emperor)
I don't think you understand how badly you've already lost, and are continuing to lose.
*If that is true* Heres what I say to that. You can't always win. (I'm not saying I lost this arguement).
I have a point I'm trying to make, you have a point you're trying to make, and we both supply supporting arguments to our *own* arguments. You haven't provided *anything* to support your argument at all that can be considered viable corroborative evidence.
[quote]Well I will say this. The reason I haven't is because I'm not the best web searcher. Or linker seeing how I've only been on this site for 3 day in total. And I've haven't had to search for links ever in my life (seeing as I'm only 14).
Isn't it you discrediting your own arguement if you brought up a website that says what I said it true?
It would be - only... it didn't.
Ok whatever the leader was called is what I meant to name him. (If their was no kings when Jesus was born I meant the emperor)
Well, if you don't know the difference, how am I supposed to regard your evaluation of history with any kind of respect?
Well I will say this. The reason I haven't is because I'm not the best web searcher. Or linker seeing how I've only been on this site for 3 day in total. And I've haven't had to search for links ever in my life (seeing as I'm only 14).
The user thisisnotanalt (he was arguing with you before) is 12. His ability to write & form sentences and paragraphs is excellent, and he cites his sources. Don't cry that I'm 27 and picking on you; if you feel like your outmatched (and you are) then don't make excuses for yourself by referring to a difference in age gap when there are people younger then you that are better at debate.
Here's a stark idea for you - get better at doing web searches & finding things to support your argument.
The user thisisnotanalt (he was arguing with you before) is 12. His ability to write & form sentences and paragraphs is excellent, and he cites his sources. Don't cry that I'm 27 and picking on you; if you feel like your outmatched (and you are) then don't make excuses for yourself by referring to a difference in age gap when there are people younger then you that are better at debate.
Wow...come to think of it, a 27 year old debating with a 14 year old...seriously? yeah hes outmatched and you have your infomation more well gathered, so why are you still arguing?
It did and one other thing it's off topic but since I can't write comments in any ones profiles I'll say this I flagged you comment about me. And you can point out someones grammar mistakes you know instead of flaming their grammar.
Well, if you don't know the difference, how am I supposed to regard your evaluation of history with any kind of respect?
I thought they were the same except for if you the emporer you are like a Napeleon. And s king just stays in his country and doesn't try to invade places.
Wow...come to think of it, a 27 year old debating with a 14 year old...seriously? yeah hes outmatched and you have your infomation more well gathered, so why are you still arguing?
If I wanted to seem altruistic, I could suggest that debate helps a person to grow, examine better arguments and improve. It's true, and it's a reason I enjoy debating sometimes as the.. devil's advocate as it were in topics I have no interest, as a mission of self-improvement; but it's not the case here.
What should I be doing? When someone posts an argument, should I check for I.D. first? Or ask them how old they are? What should the cut-off age be? Perhaps if someone is upset about the circumstances, they shouldn't have come into the arena in the first place. I've read the rules & regulations for the community forums. They don't say anything about being too old or too young to participate; it's not my responsibility to make sure that I only argue with older people.
Again, to my post re: alt - he's really bright, he can hold his own & I've debated with him a few times on the subject of holding to agnosticism or being closer to atheism. He's smart. He's twelve. Why should I make exceptions for someone that's 2 years older then him?
What should I be doing? When someone posts an argument, should I check for I.D. first? Or ask them how old they are? What should the cut-off age be? Perhaps if someone is upset about the circumstances, they shouldn't have come into the arena in the first place. I've read the rules & regulations for the community forums. They don't say anything about being too old or too young to participate; it's not my responsibility to make sure that I only argue with older people. Again, to my post re: alt - he's really bright, he can hold his own
im not saying you shouldnt debate, im just saying theres always a time in an argument where you know this is getting low.
Even though I agree with you HiddenDistance, I have to point out that maybe you should be lenient on people who don't have the experience you do. I'm 16, and I wouldn't expect to be treated specially because I'm not an adult. But as age increases, while not entirely relevant to debating skills, you're bound to get better, aren't you? My age greatly hinders my abilities here because I'm just a regular guy. I'm not very book-smart, just like to think outside the box more than many other kids my age. As weird as it sounds, it might even hinder Alt's abilities. He's a great debater and logician already, but imagine how well he'll be able to debate ten years from now... Anyway, when someone younger posts they should expect to be challenged. But when someone older posts they should expect to get some people who haven't had the educational advantage they had (a lot of the older debaters know a lot more about science than I do, obviously).
It did and one other thing it's off topic but since I can't write comments in any ones profiles I'll say this I flagged you comment about me. And you can point out someones grammar mistakes you know instead of flaming their grammar.
It really didn't. You quoted him talking about the census being a historical fact. Which it was. Umm.. okay. Whatever. If a moderator feels I've crossed the line, then I'm obliged to listen to them; that said, if your post is incomprehensible & people (and not just me either) complain about not being able to understand it, that's hardly my fault.
I thought they were the same except for if you the emporer you are like a Napeleon. And s king just stays in his country and doesn't try to invade places.
Nope, they are definitely not the same. And kings don't just stay in their country and not try to invade places:
Battle of Agincourt, Henry the Vth, King of England fights an incredibly decisive victory during the 100 years war on French soil.
But as age increases, while not entirely relevant to debating skills, you're bound to get better, aren't you?
Absolutely. But also to that point - there was a time when I was not so good at debates. How do you get better? By participating.
Ok my arguement is done here I admit I lost it but you didn't waver my belief to Christianity (Nor should you think you could do that to anyone on the internet)
Also about alt he might be lieing aout he age you know. If he's not he is unbelievably intelligent.
And you should feel pride of beating a 14 year-old in a debate with the help of an intelligently bright *12* year old.
And at the beggining of this debate I thought you were kind of nice but after seeing you flame at someones grammar, and what you wrote on my profile and your profile (that says about me). I've changed my mind into thinking your a cruel, and ignorant person.
Btw if you think I'm retarded or something believe it or not I'm an honor student at my school.
you didn't waver my belief to Christianity (Nor should you think you could do that to anyone on the internet)
I'm not surprised, and it's never my goal in the first place. I'm not interested in making converts.
And at the beggining of this debate I thought you were kind of nice but after seeing you flame at someones grammar, and what you wrote on my profile and your profile (that says about me). I've changed my mind into thinking your a cruel, and ignorant person.
I wrote that comment in your profile because you slandered me on the 'what do you believe' thread, by insinuating that I would still be living at home with my mother at age 30, so don't act all innocent.
*shrugs* Whatever. Why should I care what someone on an internet forum thinks of me? It's not really like we were going to be friends.
I wrote that comment in your profile because you slandered me on the 'what do you believe' thread, by insinuating that I would still be living at home with my mother at age 30
I didn't say that directly I just agreed with WarTank33 by saying that
