The new Debate Forum - Calling all Fighters

reply to post by beezzer


42

Originally posted by Sublimecraft
reply to post by beezzer

 

42

That's some "Deep Thought!"

reply to post by Skyfloating


adjensen has come up with a unique debate idea, one which I agree could be interesting, if permitted. (Official Request for consideration!)

He'll be along soon to post the details, but it basically goes like this:

It's a persuasion match, both of us taking the Pro. The topic is "the Resolution to the Grandfather Paradox." (Part Two of the Time Travel Series.)

We both get 1 post each, stating our resolution to the paradox, within 24 hours of the OP that adjensen would make defining the premise, the "intro" to the debate which lays out the terms stated herein.

The theory is that one of us would have a "more persuasive" post, and the post is submitted blind, so the judging would be on who has the better response, resolution so to speak, in explaining the answer to the mother of all time travel questions: What happens if you go back in time and kill your grandfather?

adjensen has formulated precisely the details, which I find completely acceptable, but I thought I'd ask for permission first.

May we try out the different format?

Congrats to Hefficide on the win in the Columbus debate...

I found it interesting how one judge gave me the win based on mentioning Zheng He, and another disqualified me for it. It is true that Zheng discovering America is a fringe theory, and not well supported. The point I was trying to make was that China possessed a lot of exploration power, maybe even enough to get to America. Didn't mean to make it sound as if the theory were fact. The book cover shot's probably what killed me.

As I was finalizing the post, I was considering deleting the entire portion about China and replacing it with something else.


Anyway, it was a really fun match. Looking forward to kicking off another debate with SonoftheSun tonight.

reply to post by Druid42


I understand the format and its approved in this exceptional case. Enjoy

Challenge Match: Druid42 vs adjensen: Is a Time Machine Possible? (TT series, Part 1)

Winner announced.

Congratulations Adjensen.

See the link for judgements.

~Tenth

reply to post by Skyfloating


Thank you!

Congrats to adjensen on the win! I was very impressed with your stance, which was well thought out, and which led to my demise. On to Part Two.

(Oh, and BTW, there have been a lot of tie-breakers of late. It's good to see so many close matches.)

Challenge Match: PatrickGarrow17 vs. SonoftheSun: Humanity will survive longer than Earth

A new debate has begun!

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17


Thank you PatrickGarrow17 for an enjoyable and thought provoking debate. I honestly thought I lost when you saved China for your final post. I'd already emptied my gun and had not prepared for that strategy at all!

You did an amazing job that deserves to be recognized! So kudos to you Sir!

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


I think PG17 will be a formidable opponent in the future. He has style, well researched, and he's willing to give it his all. Those are winning qualities, IMO, and even though he lost, at first, he'll come back shining.

Right Patrick?

Give 'em HE double hockey sticks!

reply to post by Druid42


Thanks Druid.

I'd give you gratitude and credit for encouraging me to get involved in debating but...

Your reputation on this forum is already too good, so I'll just say I agree with all your compliments.

Originally posted by Druid42
Congrats to adjensen on the win!

I was very impressed with your stance, which was well thought out, and which led to my demise. On to Part Two.

(Oh, and BTW, there have been a lot of tie-breakers of late. It's good to see so many close matches.)

Thank you, and I can now admit that I was on the verge of conceding at one point, because I'd figured out how forward time travel (via general relativity) was within the terms of the debate, and the reason that I'd spent that evening reading Philosophy of Physics: Space and Time was because I'd had the book on the side table for a month, waiting to finish some other books, and when I leafed through it to find a useful quote, I noted that he had two chapters on time and time travel, and made a pretty good case for the reality of reverse time travel! Once I'd worked through his theories and supporting materials, I was a lot less sure of myself, though he does leave the practical conclusion for the next volume in the series, which isn't out yet.

Tough debate, thanks, as always, my friend!

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Druid42

 

I understand the format and its approved in this exceptional case. Enjoy

Thank you!

Here are the terms, as I outlined them to Druid42:

For the question "Is there a resolution to the Grandfather Paradox" I think that both you and I would concur that there is, so what about if the debate is structured like this:

1) We both take the "pro" position
2) I'll create a thread with an "introduction" laying out the terms of the debate
3) We both get one post, which need to be put up at a set time (like 24 hours after the introductory post,) with a copy sent via U2U to Hefficide or Skyfloating prior to the deadline to ensure that it wasn't modified after seeing the other guy's post
4) Since we're not able to address anything the other guy brings up, this would be a persuasion debate, judged simply on who makes a better case for the "pro" position.

----

I'll create the thread shortly, which will set off the 24 hour timer. Thanks again for letting us play with a different debate style!

reply to post by adjensen


I`m ready to receive your post copies

Originally posted by PatrickGarrow17
Challenge Match: PatrickGarrow17 vs. SonoftheSun: Humanity will survive longer than Earth

A new debate has begun!

My Opening Statement is up !!

This is already Fun ! Good Luck Patrick !!

My post is up in the Grandfather Paradox Match.

Very tough to fit into 5000 characters. I used 4999. Whew!

I took a different approach, guessing that adjensen would take a more conventional path. I'm glad I don't have to be a judge, and make the ruling on this one.

It's sure to be interesting.

reply to post by Druid42


My post is up, as well, so we're ready for judging!

How's that for a quick debate?

reply to post by adjensen


Grueling, but quick!

Best of luck with the judges ruling.

Originally posted by Druid42
reply to post by Sublimecraft

 

You can tweak the title a little if you want, as the implications of a hoax is a little misleading. It is a "real" manuscript, in that it exists, and has never been deciphered, but was it's purpose to record arcane knowledge, or is it just a clever cipher with fictional material?

I'll be glad to take the con position. I'll be awaiting your opening.

OK mate - my first post is up.

Feel free to alter the title.

I have used the underlined section in your comment above as the basis for the debate.