Nominate yourself for a one-on-one debate with TruthSeeker1234

Quite frankly, a one-on-one debate will not get towards truth...it's at best propoganda (no matter which side "wins").

A better situation would be a Moderated tag-team. Let TS start the debate with his first question. OUr designated "chooser" selects the JREFite most qualified on the subject to respond. Onece that issue is settled, we move to the next question, and the person most qualified for it is chosen.

Unlike the "TruthSeekers" out there, we would rather rely on people with knowledge and expertise in appplicable fields, as opposed to talking heads who use dishonest tactics to simply over-ride their opponent, without actually offering evidence beyond "I don't think so".
 
Huntsman said:
Quite frankly, a one-on-one debate will not get towards truth...it's at best propoganda (no matter which side "wins").

A better situation would be a Moderated tag-team. Let TS start the debate with his first question. OUr designated "chooser" selects the JREFite most qualified on the subject to respond. Onece that issue is settled, we move to the next question, and the person most qualified for it is chosen.

Unlike the "TruthSeekers" out there, we would rather rely on people with knowledge and expertise in appplicable fields, as opposed to talking heads who use dishonest tactics to simply over-ride their opponent, without actually offering evidence beyond "I don't think so".
Click to expand...
heckofanidea. I'll second that
 
He can't answer questions on all his other abandoned threads!
Why would this seem like a good idea?
 
Huntsman said:
Quite frankly, a one-on-one debate will not get towards truth...it's at best propoganda (no matter which side "wins").
Click to expand...

I'm wondering where you got those two ideas?

The subject of a debate can be seen as a twisted, notted, wad of string passed back and forth while having - oh screw it. 10 points to those who understand the half-stated analogy.;)
 
Huntsman said:
Quite frankly, a one-on-one debate will not get towards truth...it's at best propoganda (no matter which side "wins").

A better situation would be a Moderated tag-team. Let TS start the debate with his first question. OUr designated "chooser" selects the JREFite most qualified on the subject to respond. Onece that issue is settled, we move to the next question, and the person most qualified for it is chosen.

Unlike the "TruthSeekers" out there, we would rather rely on people with knowledge and expertise in appplicable fields, as opposed to talking heads who use dishonest tactics to simply over-ride their opponent, without actually offering evidence beyond "I don't think so".
Click to expand...

rwguinn said:
heckofanidea. I'll second that
Click to expand...
TruthSeeker1234, what do you think of this alternative idea? Do you accept?

If not:
greyleonard said:
I'll do it.
Click to expand...
Do you accept?
 
I think the best way to do this is along the lines of what a few of us have been talking about for a while.

A dedicated thread to a single debate topic. Only three people allowed to post to the thread - the 2 debators and the arbitor. No moving on to other topics. A set period of 24 hours to reply to a given post. No declared "winner" or "loser", just the debate left for all to analyze (you will never convince either party they have lost).

TAM
 
T.A.M. said:
... No declared "winner" or "loser", just the debate left for all to analyze (you will never convince either party they have lost).

TAM
Click to expand...

On that tip, I look at it as though it's the arguments that either win or lose.
Believing that those behaving as advocates for an argument are the winners or losers shades the point that logic should take precedent to emotional attachment while critically thinking. As I'm sure you know, that clutching of ideas is what so frequently prevents an otherwise rational person from changing their views based on evidence.
 
I agree, and I have no doubt that the person who argues the points for the accepted story of 9/11 will have no issue with "no winner or loser", but the CTer arguing will almost certainly want a victory to go home and brag to the others about, or to use as further "evidence" for their "side".
 
The idea interests me, but I don't think the terms are spelled out at all.

How is airtime regulated? Who gets what amount of ink?

When is an issue "settled"?

What are the time parameters?

How would it be any different than what's happening now?

9/11 is so deep and so wide, should we break it into narrow topics, or not?
 
1) why would there be any regulation in airtime? you are asked a question, and its your job to answer it. This is a forum. Not a live debate show.
2) what do you mean by ink? You have all the text in the world to type up in a forum
3) issue is settled, when a majority of the users here agree with one side over the other.
4) it wont be any different, but it seems that the only way you'll naswer questions put to you, is if they are directed at you.
5) each question should be its own topic. address it then move on.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
How would it be any different than what's happening now?
Click to expand...


It would prevent the debater from "laying in wait" as some do. For instance, some CT'ers, not necessarily you, mind you, but some have a tendency to post an assertion, see 25 posts shooting it down, and then in response pick and choose which of the 25 they can rebut and ignore the rest. They "lay in wait" for a post they can attack, and pretend the rest were never there.

But in this format, each point will have to be addressed. There will be no skipping from topic to topic. There will be no cherry picking responses to address only those that have some kind of flaw in the wording or some angle of attack. Each assertion would have to be answered.

So, yes, it would be greatly different than what happens now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom