There have been a lot of fantastic debates in this section of the forums, so I thought we could make things a bit more "interesting." Here's how it works: I will create profiles on which 2 people will debate one-on-one on a topic of their choosing. You will receive points based on 3 categories: argument strength, evidence, and refutation. Argument strength is just that - how strong are your arguments. Logical fallacies and cogency of the argument play a strong role here (so, is the argument "correct" and does it make sense). Your spelling and grammar are important to, so either get a browser with spell-check or put your comments in Word or something that can check your spelling. Evidence is articles or journals to which you can provide links to help support your argument. How reliable the evidence is also matters, so Wikipedia articles will not count towards evidence. Refutation means being able to counter what your opponent is saying. If you can point out flaws in their argument or present counter-examples to their arguments then you can get points in this category. The debate will go on until a predetermined score has been reached. The winner will have his or her best argument point merited - thus receiving 25 AP! ---- So, if you want to join, just put your name, the topic you would like to debate about, and how many points you would like to go to (I would suggest maybe 10 or 15 for right now, I'm not exactly sure how all the scoring will work out yet). Also include your stance on the topic. Once you have this info posted, you have just given out a challenge and anyone can challenge you. If you would like to challenge someone, then post your name, their name, and the topic. Feel free to create multiple challenges, so long as you can keep track of them all! Once two debaters have been matched, I'll post a link to the profile on which you guys will be debating.
I think that's everything, but here's an example of a challenge:
Name: Moegreche Topic: Does God exist? My stance: God does not exist!
If someone were to challenge me, then they would have to argue an opposing view to mine (in this case, that God does exist). So, let the debates begin, and if anything is unclear or if I've missed anything then let me know either on this thread or on my profile. Thanks, and happy debating!!
Ricador, I think you managed to squash two topics into one. And I'm choosing to take offense. I must defend my honor: choose your weapon.
I choose anything but Darth Maul's lightsaber
...okay, yes, I'm definitely being a nerd. Because, you know, it's totally the cool thing to do. And no, Moe, you can't do that, that's an abuse of mod privileges D:
Anailator, I let your opponent know that the debate was ready, so hopefully you'll be getting a response soon. If not, you'll get the victory, but I can't give the 25 points without an actual debate, it just seems silly. XCoheedX, your topic is going to be really hard for someone to challenge, so don't hold your breath. Of course, now that I've said that I'm sure a bunch of people are all like, "Nuh uh!! I ken tayk him"
Hmmm let me see if I can answer this. God created the world and the universe with his powers. There is of course the Adam and Eve story, but I think that is more symbolic. I actually think God created one celled organisms, and stuff of the sort. Then these one celled organisms began multiplying thus evolution comes into the story. Therefore, Creationism and Evolution is wht our world is today. I'm not even totally sure if that was the question, but I answered what I thought you meant.
being athiest i don't personally agree with your opinion but deeply respect it mainly because alot of the religous people I know sling on to the word theory but its not its a scientific theory which (according to my science teacher)is a theory backed with evidence... but back to my origional point very good post coheed.
Coheed, I guess I'm being a little more meta-commentative than that. I'm just wondering, if you were to argue that kind of stance, if it would be possible to carry a debate if I didn't actually disagree that this was a possible stance but rather that it wouldn't be my preferred stance.
@Strop, Okay, so I you obviously have different views. And I didn't quite get what you were trying to say on the last part. I understand that you prefer a different stance than mine. @Assassin, this isn't a place to post that you are a book of answers. This thread is for debating.
Eh, sorry Coheed, I'm not being clear enough. I'm really tired from getting ~4 hours of sleep a night for the past fortnight (when I need 7 1/2) and working like a donkey in a 3rd world country.
I'm just wondering how strong your position is. I'd like to debate such a topic (if there was a debate) from the stance of saying "we cannot know if there is a 'God' or not" but also arguing that there's a compelling metaphysical view that can work without God.
I don't know if this opposes your view enough, or engages it sufficiently for us to have a constructive debate, seeing as you're specifically holding a stance about evolution.
