To seek or to argue?

Originally posted by sumydid
No. This is a discussion board. If this were specifically a debate forum, there would be no reason for a forum called "debates" which is obviously reserved specifically for.. debates.

You are mistaken.

"Spirituality - Debate and general discussion of the supernatural, religion, and the life after."

http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/index.php

Originally posted by FMF
You are mistaken.

[b]"Spirituality - Debate and general discussion of the supernatural, religion, and the life after."

http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/index.php[/b]

Ok, well then we are both mistaken. It's "debate AND general discussion..."

However if one of us had to be right, I would think it leans toward me, since again, there is a separate forum entitled "DEBATES" which, if one were inclined to debate 24x7, is where they would rightfully hang their hat.

Originally posted by sumydid

you seem so eager to challenge anything said by those whom you oppose.

Yes, I challenge things that I oppose. That is what debate and discussion is all about.

A believer could simply say "the sky is blue," and I expect you would question the poster's integrity and go on about the molecules in the atmosphere reflecting other colors as well, not to mention night time, etc. etc.

This is a clumsy straw man.

If your objective is to conjure up a debate no matter what your opposition says, then obviously to arrive at the truth through the mutual sharing of ideas, is not your objective.

Another clumsy straw man.

Clumsy straw men do not make for proper debate or discussion.

Originally posted by sumydid
However if one of us had to be right, I would think it leans toward me, since again, there is a separate forum entitled "DEBATES" which, if one were inclined to debate 24x7, is where they would rightfully hang their hat.

This forum was created specifically to take debates about "the supernatural, religion, and the life after" away from the forum where "topics such as world affairs, politics and other such areas of interest" are debated.

Originally posted by FMF
you seem so eager to challenge anything said by those whom you oppose.

Yes, I challenge things that I oppose. That is what debate and discussion is all about.

A believer could simply say "the sky is blue," and I expect you would question the poster's integrity and go on about the molecules in the atmosphere reflecting other colors as well, not t

Another clumsy straw man.

Clumsy straw men do not make for proper debate or discussion.

Not strawmen. Outward thoughts--not only based on previous experience--but illustrated perfectly by your reaction to said observations.

Anyway, as to the original post--to seek or to argue--I think you've made quite clear where you stand.

Good day sir, I appreciate the discussion and come away from it knowing more than I did previously, which is a plus.

Originally posted by FMF
This forum was created specifically to take debates about "the supernatural, religion, and the life after" away from the forum where "topics such as world affairs, politics and other such areas of interest" are debated.

Did you completely miss the "AND GENERAL DISCUSSION" part of your example?

A rhetorical question, as obviously you did.

Originally posted by sumydid
Not strawmen. Outward thoughts--not only based on previous experience--but illustrated perfectly by your reaction to said observations.

If you can find a single post of mine in the last 7 years where I challenged a claim like "the sky is blue" by "going on about the molecules in the atmosphere reflecting other colors as well" or anything remotely akin to it, then you'd be right - it wouldn't be a straw man. But you can't. So it is a straw man. And a clumsy one at that.

Originally posted by sumydid
Did you completely miss the [b]"AND GENERAL DISCUSSION" part of your example?

A rhetorical question, as obviously you did.[/b]

This forum is for debates too, expressly so. You are mistaken if you think debating is not supposed to go on here. You should take it up with the site's owners, not with me, if you don't think there should be debate on this forum.

Originally posted by FMF
If you can find a single post of mine in the last 7 years where I challenged a claim like "the sky is blue" by "going on about the molecules in the atmosphere reflecting other colors as well" or anything remotely akin to it, then you'd be right - it wouldn't be a straw man. But you can't. So it is a straw man. And a clumsy one at that.

This must be amateur hour.

My statement was not clumsy at all; nor was it a strawman argument. The statement was 100% factual.

So either you need to reread the statement and reassess your position, or, you need to google "clumsy" and "strawman" so that you can better understand why your claim is false. In fact, it is your claim that is "clumsy" because again, either you clumsily didn't bother to read exactly what I said, or, you clumsily never bothered to educate yourself on what a "clumsy strawman" is.

Bye. Better things to do than argue. By the way, the next time you feel like arguing for the sake of arguing (which I expect will be in about 1 minute), try presenting an argument that has at least a shred of validity.

Originally posted by FMF
This forum is for debates too, expressly so. You are mistaken if you think debating is not supposed to go on here. You should take it up with the site's owners, not with me, if you don't think there should be debate on this forum.

I freely admitted, after you made your initial point, that this forum is for BOTH debates and general discussion.

So your indication that I may think "debating is not supposed to go on here" was blown away several posts ago. Try to keep up.


Good night, sir, and God bless.

Originally posted by sumydid
This must be amateur hour.

My statement was not clumsy at all; nor was it a strawman argument. The statement was 100% factual.

I have never once argued something like "the molecules in the atmosphere [reflect] other colors as well" in answer to an assertion like "the sky is blue". It has never been the kind of thing I post. So you claiming it to be "100% factual" is nonsense.

Originally posted by sumydid
Now, now. Be more realistic. I mean, yes, the Atheists (here and on any forum that I've seen) tend to generally be dismissive and argumentative toward any believer. But I think all Atheists and Agnostics, to some degree at least, DO seek truth.

In our opinions, as believers, we've FOUND the truth; the essential truth, anyway. So by attrition, the only ...[text shortened]... fe and other things science can't explain--whether they believe what they hear or not.

Er... explaining what afterlife?

Originally posted by googlefudge
Precisely.

When someone tells you that they think that you will spend an eternity being tortured
and that you will deserve it and that they are looking forward to watching and feeling
smug about it...

Why on earth should you be polite to, or respect that person?

When someone blatantly lies and refuses to engage in any kind of reasoned debat hange their mind no matter what evidence or
reasons they are given... Even IF they are right.

Not sure what to make of this. The examples you've cited don't really coincide with the point I was trying to make.

The following REALLY threw me at first:
"I can't and wont respect someone who wont change their mind no matter what evidence or
reasons they are given... Even IF they are right."

When I first read it, I took "they" to refer to "someone" which is wholly ridiculous. Finally I decided "they" must refer to "evidence or reasons", which is still awkward, but not completely ridiculous. Please tell me that the latter was your intent.

Originally posted by galveston75
Perhaps nothing I say means anything to you. I'm sure it doesn't as many of your post allude to.
I usually hope to have a decent discussion with anyone here and I hope that just maybe, I can share something good from the Bible that I have learned by studing it.
This world doesn't offer much hope for the future and mankind but in turn the Bible does e ...[text shortened]... wered in the way he wants.
My opinion of this situation just as anyone else has theirs.

From what I've seen, by and large FMF is doing just as he claims: "...point[ing] out the inconsistencies or contradictions in the things you and others say". Instead of directly addressing his points, you, RC, et al., often avoid doing so . So he keeps putting it in front of you. Why don't you simply directly address his points instead of avoiding it and "playing the victim" as you keep trying to do here? If you are unable to refute his point, then simply admit that he is right. Your inability to do so likely stems from pride (which I hope you'll agree is not a good thing).

Originally posted by sumydid
No. This is a discussion board. If this were specifically a debate forum, there would be no reason for a forum called "debates" which is obviously reserved specifically for.. debates.

However, your belief that this is a debate forum goes far in explaining why you seem so eager to challenge anything said by those whom you oppose. A believer could ...[text shortened]... ing of ideas, is not your objective. Thanks for sharing, and putting my curiosity to rest.

There is nothing incorrect with FMF saying "This is a debate forum" and he proved it with his reference to the following: ""Spirituality - Debate and general discussion of the supernatural, religion, and the life after."

Evidently you lack even an elementary understanding of logic. The above description means that it is BOTH a "debate" and "general discussion" forum. For you to respond to his claim by saying "No. This is a discussion board." is just plain wrong. It's like your responding to a claim that a woman, who is BOTH a wife AND mother, is a wife by saying "No. She is a [mother]."