I am in an official one v one debate with a creationist over the earth's age.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-07-2012, 06:23 AM (This post was last modified: 21-07-2012 06:27 AM by Logisch.)
RE: I am in an official one v one debate with a creationist over the earth's age.
Shouldn't your goal to be to provide them with something productive? Sometimes "wiping the floor" as you speak only makes the entire situation bitter for the person. A debate with a goal in mind is far more productive. You could provide them with the most rational argument against their position and make them not want to listen to you. Or, you could strategically talk to them about it in such a way that makes them more interested and perhaps even question their position. Wouldn't that be a better thing, don't you think? I know you're young, so it's easy to get motivated to want to get out a sword and shield and go battle every theist in a debate, but if all you want to do is "pwn" people, you have to ask what the end result is, and if the debate was productive for you and them. Hitchens for instance.... one of the MOST in your face, won't stop and won't give you an inch type debaters was also insanely strategic about his words and provided even the most common people with misconceptions things in debate that could leave someone questioning their position. He was damn good at it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-07-2012, 09:54 AM
RE: I am in an official one v one debate with a creationist over the earth's age.
(21-07-2012 06:23 AM)Logisch Wrote:  Shouldn't your goal to be to provide them with something productive? Sometimes "wiping the floor" as you speak only makes the entire situation bitter for the person. A debate with a goal in mind is far more productive. You could provide them with the most rational argument against their position and make them not want to listen to you. Or, you could strategically talk to them about it in such a way that makes them more interested and perhaps even question their position. Wouldn't that be a better thing, don't you think? I know you're young, so it's easy to get motivated to want to get out a sword and shield and go battle every theist in a debate, but if all you want to do is "pwn" people, you have to ask what the end result is, and if the debate was productive for you and them. Hitchens for instance.... one of the MOST in your face, won't stop and won't give you an inch type debaters was also insanely strategic about his words and provided even the most common people with misconceptions things in debate that could leave someone questioning their position. He was damn good at it.
Dude, I get it. The point was to be funny. There are multiple reasons why I accepted the debate request, and the reason why I know it isn't going to be my "Win." Is because we are debating on a christian forum site, and debating on something which the science favors me.

He made it plainly clear, the only thing he is interested is wiping the floor with me, he isn't trying to convince me, he is trying to show off to his buddies on the forum.

I can at least throw out the possibility that I will make him understand and accept the Old Earth conclusion, and favor a match way where I debunk most of his words (wiping the floor) and leaving them up to decide. This isn't but for pleasure to him, and therefor I shall reciprocate that feeling.

If he isn't going to take it as seriously as I want, why waste my time fighting a useless battle when I can get my point across in a better way, more profound way, that doesn't need to end with my "win."

I just hope this won't become a pissing match.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-07-2012, 12:08 PM
RE: I am in an official one v one debate with a creationist over the earth's age.
This is what I just don't get about this debate... old earth and the theory of evolution is so incredibly easy to disprove. The whole theory is like a thin glass sheet. All it takes is one tiny pepple dropped in the center to shatter the whole theory... and yet, creationists can't do it. All it takes is ONE fossil found out of place, for instance a single human bone found in the same strata as a dinosaur bone and the whole theory of evolution would crumble. And yet they can't provide such evidence. Instead all they can do is refute the theory on philosophical grounds which is really quite pointless in the face of actual evidence that supports it. I really don't get it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like ibanezerscrooge's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: