Head-to-head subforum request

[otseng]

If you would like to debate in a head-to-head debate, find an opponent and agree on a topic. Then both of you must post here with the topic title you two have agreed on and then send me a PM with the link to your request. You two should also agree beforehand the format of the debate. I'll then give you both membership to the usergroup. You are then free to create the topic and debate.

After the debate is over, PM me and I'll lock the thread and remove you from the usergroup.

[Nickman]

[Replying to post 58 by Wolfbitn]

Alright then. You have both been added to the appropriate group. Go ahead

Can we place an 8 page limit on the debate? I don't wanna debate this forever.

[Wolfbitn]

Hello

This is to be concurrent with my debate with Nickman...
Divine Insight and I are also wanting a 2nd debate thread head to head regarding the very same debate... This is to debate my theory of Genesis 1, the Big Bang, and which is the best theory overall.

1) WHICH of the 2 have been most tested?
2) Which of the 2 fared better in their respective tests?
3) Which is the BEST overal theory?





THIS is the debate.


The Rules:
1) Peer-reviewed sources only.
2) Theological sources old and new can be used, recognizing that just as in science, theologians disagree.
3) No empty, unsupported claims may be made; back up all positive statements with evidence.
4) Direct questions MUST be answered in an intelligent way, with supporting evidence, or a simple "I dont know" will work.
5) Misrepresenting another debater is a disqualifying factor. Ask questions if you are unsure about what they are saying.
6) Posts will be of a reasonable length allowing room however to properly address subjects at hand.

Unlimited posts, but each only posting in turn. I will be posting first.

Many thank yous

[Nickman]

Hello

This is to be concurrent with my debate with Nickman...
Divine Insight and I are also wanting a 2nd debate thread head to head regarding the very same debate... This is to debate my theory of Genesis 1, the Big Bang, and which is the best theory overall.

1) WHICH of the 2 have been most tested?
2) Which of the 2 fared better in their respective tests?
3) Which is the BEST overal theory?





THIS is the debate.


The Rules:
1) Peer-reviewed sources only.
2) Theological sources old and new can be used, recognizing that just as in science, theologians disagree.
3) No empty, unsupported claims may be made; back up all positive statements with evidence.
4) Direct questions MUST be answered in an intelligent way, with supporting evidence, or a simple "I dont know" will work.
5) Misrepresenting another debater is a disqualifying factor. Ask questions if you are unsure about what they are saying.
6) Posts will be of a reasonable length allowing room however to properly address subjects at hand.

Unlimited posts, but each only posting in turn. I will be posting first.

Many thank yous

So then what is our debate about? I'm confused now.

[Divine Insight]

Hello

This is to be concurrent with my debate with Nickman...
Divine Insight and I are also wanting a 2nd debate thread head to head regarding the very same debate... This is to debate my theory of Genesis 1, the Big Bang, and which is the best theory overall.

Dear Otseng,

I am willing to debate Wolfbitn head-to-head as I had offered to him in another thread. However, Wolfbitn has a very bad habit of totally ignoring what other people say. So I would like to clear a few thing up on our Head-to-Head debate.

To begin with I demand that he does indeed present HIS THEORY for Gen 1. Just as he had proposed above in his claim.

In fact this will be the very first issue that I would like to see resolved within our head-to-head debate before we move onto the following:

1) WHICH of the 2 have been most tested?
2) Which of the 2 fared better in their respective tests?
3) Which is the BEST overal theory?

Before he can even address any of these questions he must first demonstrate that he actually has a valid "theory" to even discuss and compare with Big Bang Theory or Big Bang Cosmology.

So that will be the issue that must be resolved first in our debate. Before we can even move forward to his enumerated questions above.

THIS is the debate.

The Rules:
1) Peer-reviewed sources only.
2) Theological sources old and new can be used, recognizing that just as in science, theologians disagree.
3) No empty, unsupported claims may be made; back up all positive statements with evidence.
4) Direct questions MUST be answered in an intelligent way, with supporting evidence, or a simple "I dont know" will work.
5) Misrepresenting another debater is a disqualifying factor. Ask questions if you are unsure about what they are saying.
6) Posts will be of a reasonable length allowing room however to properly address subjects at hand.

I have no problem with these rules except possibly with rule #1. I personally don't anticipate any need to present any peer-reviewed sources. Everything I intend to present is pretty much well-accepted common knowledge. If I do introduce any externally sourced information I will be sure that it is of the highest credentials.

Unlimited posts, but each only posting in turn. I will be posting first.

Many thank yous

No, I did not agree to unlimited posts.

On the contrary, I offer the following limitations on this debate:

We begin by each giving a single opening post. Wolfbitn is more than welcome to go first. I will then post my response to his challenge to set the stage for what I intend to address.

I suggest that after these opening posts we will each post up to 10 posts in turn. He will begin, and I will follow. This will be a total of a maximum of 20 posts. At that time we must either BOTH agree to go on for another 20 posts or if either one is not interested in moving forward from there, the debate is over.

Two final closing arguments can then be posted. One from each of us.

The reason I am proposing it this way is because Wolfbitn claims to have a scientific theory of Genesis 1. And if cannot establish this within 10 posts then there is really no point in moving forward beyond that. I seriously do not anticipate him being able to do this. Therefore I expect that this debate will end within the 20 post limit.

It will only move forward beyond this point if he can establish that he actually has a "theory" worthy of discussion.

Thank you.

[Nickman]

Hello

This is to be concurrent with my debate with Nickman...
Divine Insight and I are also wanting a 2nd debate thread head to head regarding the very same debate... This is to debate my theory of Genesis 1, the Big Bang, and which is the best theory overall.

Dear Otseng,

I am willing to debate Wolfbitn head-to-head as I had offered to him in another thread. However, Wolfbitn has a very bad habit of totally ignoring what other people say. So I would like to clear a few thing up on our Head-to-Head debate.

To begin with I demand that he does indeed present HIS THEORY for Gen 1. Just as he had proposed above in his claim.

In fact this will be the very first issue that I would like to see resolved within our head-to-head debate before we move onto the following:

1) WHICH of the 2 have been most tested?
2) Which of the 2 fared better in their respective tests?
3) Which is the BEST overal theory?

Before he can even address any of these questions he must first demonstrate that he actually has a valid "theory" to even discuss and compare with Big Bang Theory or Big Bang Cosmology.

So that will be the issue that must be resolved first in our debate. Before we can even move forward to his enumerated questions above.

THIS is the debate.

The Rules:
1) Peer-reviewed sources only.
2) Theological sources old and new can be used, recognizing that just as in science, theologians disagree.
3) No empty, unsupported claims may be made; back up all positive statements with evidence.
4) Direct questions MUST be answered in an intelligent way, with supporting evidence, or a simple "I dont know" will work.
5) Misrepresenting another debater is a disqualifying factor. Ask questions if you are unsure about what they are saying.
6) Posts will be of a reasonable length allowing room however to properly address subjects at hand.

I have no problem with these rules except possibly with rule #1. I personally don't anticipate any need to present any peer-reviewed sources. Everything I intend to present is pretty much well-accepted common knowledge. If I do introduce any externally sourced information I will be sure that it is of the highest credentials.

Unlimited posts, but each only posting in turn. I will be posting first.

Many thank yous

No, I did not agree to unlimited posts.

On the contrary, I offer the following limitations on this debate:

We begin by each giving a single opening post. Wolfbitn is more than welcome to go first. I will then post my response to his challenge to set the stage for what I intend to address.

I suggest that after these opening posts we will each post up to 10 posts in turn. He will begin, and I will follow. This will be a total of a maximum of 20 posts. At that time we must either BOTH agree to go on for another 20 posts or if either one is not interested in moving forward from there, the debate is over.

Two final closing arguments can then be posted. One from each of us.

The reason I am proposing it this way is because Wolfbitn claims to have a scientific theory of Genesis 1. And if cannot establish this within 10 posts then there is really no point in moving forward beyond that. I seriously do not anticipate him being able to do this. Therefore I expect that this debate will end within the 20 post limit.

It will only move forward beyond this point if he can establish that he actually has a "theory" worthy of discussion.

Thank you.

I am just gonna let you do it since there is no rhyme or reason. Two debates about the same thing? I'll just watch. I am not even sure what wolf wanted to debate now. I will get the popcorn ready.

[Wolfbitn]

Hello

This is to be concurrent with my debate with Nickman...
Divine Insight and I are also wanting a 2nd debate thread head to head regarding the very same debate... This is to debate my theory of Genesis 1, the Big Bang, and which is the best theory overall.

Dear Otseng,

I am willing to debate Wolfbitn head-to-head as I had offered to him in another thread. However, Wolfbitn has a very bad habit of totally ignoring what other people say. So I would like to clear a few thing up on our Head-to-Head debate.

To begin with I demand that he does indeed present HIS THEORY for Gen 1. Just as he had proposed above in his claim.

In fact this will be the very first issue that I would like to see resolved within our head-to-head debate before we move onto the following:

1) WHICH of the 2 have been most tested?
2) Which of the 2 fared better in their respective tests?
3) Which is the BEST overal theory?

Before he can even address any of these questions he must first demonstrate that he actually has a valid "theory" to even discuss and compare with Big Bang Theory or Big Bang Cosmology.

So that will be the issue that must be resolved first in our debate. Before we can even move forward to his enumerated questions above.

THIS is the debate.

The Rules:
1) Peer-reviewed sources only.
2) Theological sources old and new can be used, recognizing that just as in science, theologians disagree.
3) No empty, unsupported claims may be made; back up all positive statements with evidence.
4) Direct questions MUST be answered in an intelligent way, with supporting evidence, or a simple "I dont know" will work.
5) Misrepresenting another debater is a disqualifying factor. Ask questions if you are unsure about what they are saying.
6) Posts will be of a reasonable length allowing room however to properly address subjects at hand.

I have no problem with these rules except possibly with rule #1. I personally don't anticipate any need to present any peer-reviewed sources. Everything I intend to present is pretty much well-accepted common knowledge. If I do introduce any externally sourced information I will be sure that it is of the highest credentials.

Unlimited posts, but each only posting in turn. I will be posting first.

Many thank yous

No, I did not agree to unlimited posts.

On the contrary, I offer the following limitations on this debate:

We begin by each giving a single opening post. Wolfbitn is more than welcome to go first. I will then post my response to his challenge to set the stage for what I intend to address.

I suggest that after these opening posts we will each post up to 10 posts in turn. He will begin, and I will follow. This will be a total of a maximum of 20 posts. At that time we must either BOTH agree to go on for another 20 posts or if either one is not interested in moving forward from there, the debate is over.

Two final closing arguments can then be posted. One from each of us.

The reason I am proposing it this way is because Wolfbitn claims to have a scientific theory of Genesis 1. And if cannot establish this within 10 posts then there is really no point in moving forward beyond that. I seriously do not anticipate him being able to do this. Therefore I expect that this debate will end within the 20 post limit.

It will only move forward beyond this point if he can establish that he actually has a "theory" worthy of discussion.

Thank you.

I accept the 20 post limit AND THEN 2 closing posts each, for a total of 22 posts... this is the only change that will take place to the rules and procedure. I will post the opening post.

Posting to the moderator asking for calls and decisions and judgements wilL NOT count against the 22 postings allowed for each debater

[Wolfbitn]

[Replying to post 65 by Nickman]

I will make the same agreement i made with Divine.

20 posts each with then 2 closing arguments posted by each poster for a total of 22 posts each.

I will let you choose 2 mods, one Christian and one Atheist. Postings to moderators asking for a decision or a judgement will not count against our 22 posts each. I will post the opening post youll have last word.

[Nickman]

[Replying to post 65 by Nickman]

I will make the same agreement i made with Divine.

20 posts each with then 2 closing arguments posted by each poster for a total of 22 posts each.

I will let you choose 2 mods, one Christian and one Atheist. Postings to moderators asking for a decision or a judgement will not count against our 22 posts each. I will post the opening post youll have last word.

I have handed my debate to DI. There is no point of two debates on the same OP. This would lead to simultaneous debates about the same information. He will take the debate, and I will watch.

[Wolfbitn]

[Replying to post 68 by Nickman]

I am MORE than happy to field both debates Nick, no problem. Hang with me and I will post the op very shortly.

Also I dont believe Divine has access to the forum yet.

so 2??

.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 69 by Wolfbitn]

I would like to debate a second topic if you are willing when these debates are done.