I mean, I remember reading that they were so inseparable there was a school rumor that they had a sexual relationship. But I've never seen any evidence to make me think that rumor was true.
Eric Harris wrote in his journal:
"Gays.... well all gays, ALL gays, should be killed. Mit keine fragen. Lesbians are fun to watch if they are hot but still, its not human. It’s a fucking disease."
It's hard to imagine him engaging in a homosexual relationship with Dylan.
They were definitely extremely close and absorbed with each other, their personalities synergizing on a deep -- and disastrous -- level. "Soulmates" would not be an invalid description. But I don't think it was sexual. I think that would probably have gone against their violent macho tough-guy psychology.
And no, I haven't seen it. It's a... fictional reenactment of Columbine? Seems like a weird subject for a film. Why did the filmmaker make it?
I think it shook people so much because there was no satisfying explanation. Even when I put all the ingredients in your list together it still just doesn't add up to me. Motive aside, where did their sheer resolve and follow-through come from? I would have expected a couple of kids to get cold feet, to have second thoughts as the date approached, to be afraid of dying even if they hated life.
As for your optimism that they felt regret... well, I guess they did leave goodbye videos for their families saying they were sorry. That always seemed weird to me. Sorry for what? What they were about to do? They definitely weren't sorry about that. Maybe they were just acknowledging the impact their actions would have on their families -- but that still doesn't count as showing remorse for their victims. I wouldn't hold my breath.
Whoops, forgot about this. Now I'm necro-bumping a dead debate.
Thanks. Sounds like my doubts were correct (should be my epitaph). And there is footage of Dylan and Eric in I think the cafeteria? It does show one of the boys shooting, but at one of their propane tanks, not at people. Turns out they weren't the slick bomb builders they thought they were, were they. But they still got their wish. They went down in infamy and became the focus of widespread attention and fascination.
Strangely, one of the hardest things for me to understand about this was how unaffected they seemed by survival instinct or animal self-preservation.
Check the video out, it's on Liveleak (google liveleak+columbine). Let me know if the footage looks fabricated to you, like the others you've seen.
But I really, really need to warn you: it's *extremely* graphic, even if fake. I'm serious. The first time I watched it I had to stop it pretty soon into the recording. Too intense, too much reality.
Yeah, I believe Eric Harris was formally (and posthumously) diagnosed as a born psychopath. I certainly don't blame Eric's parents for the way he was born -- but I do wonder if he would have been able to stockpile guns in his room and make explosives in the garage if they had been more attentive and involved in his life. But look at me gettin' all judgy. You might put me back on your Starbucks list.
Did you see that supposedly leaked tape of the whole shooting from inside the school. Unsourced and zero credibility, of course, but I never could quite tell if it was fake.
Yeah I saw her TED Talk. Heavy stuff, really uncomfortable to watch. It had to be hard to stand up like that and describe her shame about totally failing as a mother.
Have you noticed that Eric Harris's parents have never made any public statements or appearances? They just disappeared. Whoosh, gone. They had the most to answer for, imo.
Oh, I'd want to see the tapes too. Of course I would, they'd be fucking fascinating. I'm no less guilty of digging into the case. There's always that driving need to understand how they could possibly have brought themselves to do this. But as with anything, it comes down to the risk/reward ratio. I didn't mean to derail your comments section with loads of Columbine stuff btw. My bad.
It was definitely a shame to lose their historical and scientific value. A supposed transcript of the tapes does still exist. It's pretty chilling. At one point they speculate about how their parents will respond once they discover the tapes after the shooting, mocking their reaction: "Oh if only we'd reached them sooner! If only we'd found these tapes!"
But you must know that if those tapes were made public, the vast majority of viewers would not be educated, mentally fortified, psychological scientists. You'd be exposing them to average untrained people who are susceptible to strong dominant personalities like Eric Harris's. The tapes would be enshrined by every angry malcontent kid in the English speaking world.
"Anything can exist. If this is countered by the answer 'anything can exist except a thing that can't exist', then this concedes that conceptual things (such as something that can't exist) exist, as concepts. If concepts exist, the concept of a virus means that it exists anyway."
That awkward moment when someone is like "I may not agree with you most of the time..." and you can't remember ever having a serious argument with them.
Anyway I've seen bish's thoughts on the subject. I just do not agree. Conduct and sources matter, even independently of arguments -- someone could make amazing arguments but have crappy sources and deplorable debate conduct. Even spelling and grammar should count, if you wall of text your arguments you should be docked for being an offense to my eyeballs.
Was gonna give this a read-through and vote, then saw it's one of those "just pick the winner" debates. Want to abstain in protest of those things. Boo! Hiss! Castin enjoys being able to award separate points for separate categories of merit!
Wow. I didn't know thett ever debated issues. I thought that during the calm periods between e-drama he basically went dormant in a cryogenic stasis pod, hibernating in the sarcophagus position -- lying down, eyes closed, arms crossed over his chest in an X -- with tubes and IV's connected to his body to keep him alive until the next flamewar, at which point he awakens and rises again.
You @'ed me about 2 pages and 0.4 flamewars ago. Don't really know if you're still interested in a response from me or Virt, but here's mine.
I see what you're saying. For my part, I had perceived Pro's "additions to definitions" in his R1 to be a mere clarification of the preexisting definitions. I also saw comment #34.
Nah I don't think this can be topped for wording & succinctness: "Con needs to show that God does not exist OR that humans do not depend on Him to live. He fails to meet this burden. By arguing that the sun is not God but God is God, he concedes the resolution."
That's cool, I definitely identify with that. If I may suggest, it sounds like what you want is the forums, then. No criteria, no rules, no votes. Just discussion. It's my preference.
For instance you may have enjoyed this debate a lot more if you'd had it in the religion forum: https://www.debateart.com/forum/16/topics
Sorry, I just can't bring myself to fairly vote on whether a person should end their life. Regardless of the soundness of the arguments on either side, my vote would remain the same.
An academic abstraction as in a purely conceptual talking point, like everything else we debate here. This is your life. It's not rhetoric.
When you're depressed you always think the wool's been pulled off from over your eyes and you're finally seeing things as they really are -- the cold, hard, hopeless truth. But I don't really know you. If you think you'll get something out of this debate, it's certainly your right to have it. But I think you've already found the reason why you shouldn't take your life.
The fate and value of a human life should not be debated in a win/lose contest like some academic abstraction.
What do you expect this debate to accomplish? By the time you're suicidal, you are beyond the reach of logic. Reasons, arguments -- meaningless. The feeling is all that's truly real; to contemplate anything else is to contemplate the unreal. It has all blurred into a sourceless gray fog without beginning or end, and you are conscious of nothing but the desire to reach a place where you simply cannot think or feel anymore.
You both did a pretty good job juggling alliteration and rhyme. I was expecting both of you to abandon rhyme because it would place further limits on you. Good show.
This will be excellent. I've long debated the necessity in my mind. The whole world was closing in on the Empire of Japan at this point and their defeat was certain and imminent. It remains a matter of whether it would have cost more lives to wait for that to happen.
I'm not really presenting anything. I thought it was hilarious when I followed your link in the votes tab and before I had a laugh about it I wanted to be reasonably insured against an "oh yeah well that was me numnuts" retort from T1.
@Smithereens I'm saying if a rapper is as concise as humanly possible and raps about a concept for thirty seconds, and a conventional singer is as concise as humanly possible and sings about a concept for thirty seconds, the rapper will probably have been able to address that concept in more detail or complexity because he simply got to say more. Any argument that the content or meaning of rap music is superior to any other music is of course absurd.
Ah, you were so close.
I mean, I remember reading that they were so inseparable there was a school rumor that they had a sexual relationship. But I've never seen any evidence to make me think that rumor was true.
Eric Harris wrote in his journal:
"Gays.... well all gays, ALL gays, should be killed. Mit keine fragen. Lesbians are fun to watch if they are hot but still, its not human. It’s a fucking disease."
It's hard to imagine him engaging in a homosexual relationship with Dylan.
They were definitely extremely close and absorbed with each other, their personalities synergizing on a deep -- and disastrous -- level. "Soulmates" would not be an invalid description. But I don't think it was sexual. I think that would probably have gone against their violent macho tough-guy psychology.
And no, I haven't seen it. It's a... fictional reenactment of Columbine? Seems like a weird subject for a film. Why did the filmmaker make it?
I think it shook people so much because there was no satisfying explanation. Even when I put all the ingredients in your list together it still just doesn't add up to me. Motive aside, where did their sheer resolve and follow-through come from? I would have expected a couple of kids to get cold feet, to have second thoughts as the date approached, to be afraid of dying even if they hated life.
As for your optimism that they felt regret... well, I guess they did leave goodbye videos for their families saying they were sorry. That always seemed weird to me. Sorry for what? What they were about to do? They definitely weren't sorry about that. Maybe they were just acknowledging the impact their actions would have on their families -- but that still doesn't count as showing remorse for their victims. I wouldn't hold my breath.
Whoops, forgot about this. Now I'm necro-bumping a dead debate.
Thanks. Sounds like my doubts were correct (should be my epitaph). And there is footage of Dylan and Eric in I think the cafeteria? It does show one of the boys shooting, but at one of their propane tanks, not at people. Turns out they weren't the slick bomb builders they thought they were, were they. But they still got their wish. They went down in infamy and became the focus of widespread attention and fascination.
Strangely, one of the hardest things for me to understand about this was how unaffected they seemed by survival instinct or animal self-preservation.
Check the video out, it's on Liveleak (google liveleak+columbine). Let me know if the footage looks fabricated to you, like the others you've seen.
But I really, really need to warn you: it's *extremely* graphic, even if fake. I'm serious. The first time I watched it I had to stop it pretty soon into the recording. Too intense, too much reality.
Yeah, I believe Eric Harris was formally (and posthumously) diagnosed as a born psychopath. I certainly don't blame Eric's parents for the way he was born -- but I do wonder if he would have been able to stockpile guns in his room and make explosives in the garage if they had been more attentive and involved in his life. But look at me gettin' all judgy. You might put me back on your Starbucks list.
Did you see that supposedly leaked tape of the whole shooting from inside the school. Unsourced and zero credibility, of course, but I never could quite tell if it was fake.
Yeah I saw her TED Talk. Heavy stuff, really uncomfortable to watch. It had to be hard to stand up like that and describe her shame about totally failing as a mother.
Have you noticed that Eric Harris's parents have never made any public statements or appearances? They just disappeared. Whoosh, gone. They had the most to answer for, imo.
Oh, I'd want to see the tapes too. Of course I would, they'd be fucking fascinating. I'm no less guilty of digging into the case. There's always that driving need to understand how they could possibly have brought themselves to do this. But as with anything, it comes down to the risk/reward ratio. I didn't mean to derail your comments section with loads of Columbine stuff btw. My bad.
It was definitely a shame to lose their historical and scientific value. A supposed transcript of the tapes does still exist. It's pretty chilling. At one point they speculate about how their parents will respond once they discover the tapes after the shooting, mocking their reaction: "Oh if only we'd reached them sooner! If only we'd found these tapes!"
But you must know that if those tapes were made public, the vast majority of viewers would not be educated, mentally fortified, psychological scientists. You'd be exposing them to average untrained people who are susceptible to strong dominant personalities like Eric Harris's. The tapes would be enshrined by every angry malcontent kid in the English speaking world.
They destroyed the basement tapes because they were afraid if they got out it would inspire future mass shooters. Their brainwashy power was extreme.
"Anything can exist. If this is countered by the answer 'anything can exist except a thing that can't exist', then this concedes that conceptual things (such as something that can't exist) exist, as concepts. If concepts exist, the concept of a virus means that it exists anyway."
Genius.
This seems less like a debate over an equal-sided issue and more like one person not being educated about science.
WisdomofAges has been unleashed upon the debate section. Run for your families. Run.
An agreement about the BoP is something you need to nail down before you debate.
Lol. Sure it is, thett. Shhh, it's okay. Safe place. Circle of trust, circle of trust. Fall back and I'll catch you unless I get a text message.
All right, that reply somewhat redeems you.
Ikr. In proper voting that forfeiture would have lost him the conduct point.
That awkward moment when someone is like "I may not agree with you most of the time..." and you can't remember ever having a serious argument with them.
Anyway I've seen bish's thoughts on the subject. I just do not agree. Conduct and sources matter, even independently of arguments -- someone could make amazing arguments but have crappy sources and deplorable debate conduct. Even spelling and grammar should count, if you wall of text your arguments you should be docked for being an offense to my eyeballs.
Was gonna give this a read-through and vote, then saw it's one of those "just pick the winner" debates. Want to abstain in protest of those things. Boo! Hiss! Castin enjoys being able to award separate points for separate categories of merit!
Ah, thx. I suppose the reason is to exploit the mean girls factor? Kinda crappy emoji tho. Those do not look like fingers.
I was hoping for a more creative riposte tbh.
Pretty sure I arrived at DART the same time you did. What is that emoji? I can't tell what it is.
Wow. I didn't know thett ever debated issues. I thought that during the calm periods between e-drama he basically went dormant in a cryogenic stasis pod, hibernating in the sarcophagus position -- lying down, eyes closed, arms crossed over his chest in an X -- with tubes and IV's connected to his body to keep him alive until the next flamewar, at which point he awakens and rises again.
You @'ed me about 2 pages and 0.4 flamewars ago. Don't really know if you're still interested in a response from me or Virt, but here's mine.
I see what you're saying. For my part, I had perceived Pro's "additions to definitions" in his R1 to be a mere clarification of the preexisting definitions. I also saw comment #34.
Actually, that's probably being too kind. I've made perfectly fine source RFD's before, but this time I just got lax and made an oversight.
Thanks Virt. I'm a work in progress.
Out of curiosity, why did you vote sources a tie?
There ya go. We'll see if it passes inspection.
Yup, that's my bad. Sorry about that, Pro and Con.
Nah I don't think this can be topped for wording & succinctness: "Con needs to show that God does not exist OR that humans do not depend on Him to live. He fails to meet this burden. By arguing that the sun is not God but God is God, he concedes the resolution."
Best vote goes to Virt imo.
That's cool, I definitely identify with that. If I may suggest, it sounds like what you want is the forums, then. No criteria, no rules, no votes. Just discussion. It's my preference.
For instance you may have enjoyed this debate a lot more if you'd had it in the religion forum: https://www.debateart.com/forum/16/topics
Did anyone else laugh and harder and harder with every "praise be unto hydrogen"?
I hope you do have a rematch. Shame he's not responding.
Sorry, I just can't bring myself to fairly vote on whether a person should end their life. Regardless of the soundness of the arguments on either side, my vote would remain the same.
There's a duck behind you.
It's staring with glowing red eyes.
... I can hear its thoughts. "I am Spoopy. Fear me."
Can't stop laughing. Help.
An academic abstraction as in a purely conceptual talking point, like everything else we debate here. This is your life. It's not rhetoric.
When you're depressed you always think the wool's been pulled off from over your eyes and you're finally seeing things as they really are -- the cold, hard, hopeless truth. But I don't really know you. If you think you'll get something out of this debate, it's certainly your right to have it. But I think you've already found the reason why you shouldn't take your life.
The fate and value of a human life should not be debated in a win/lose contest like some academic abstraction.
What do you expect this debate to accomplish? By the time you're suicidal, you are beyond the reach of logic. Reasons, arguments -- meaningless. The feeling is all that's truly real; to contemplate anything else is to contemplate the unreal. It has all blurred into a sourceless gray fog without beginning or end, and you are conscious of nothing but the desire to reach a place where you simply cannot think or feel anymore.
Wyl, you said you're not sure if you can make it through this debate without blowing your head off. I'm concerned. Is that true?
Wylted, are you serious about this?
How can you compare a finished site to an unfinished site.
lmao
Oh man this debate idea is genius and your R1 was genius.
You both did a pretty good job juggling alliteration and rhyme. I was expecting both of you to abandon rhyme because it would place further limits on you. Good show.
"You sob inexplicably as you sit in a corner"? I'd say that's some very explicable sobbing. 🙃
This will be excellent. I've long debated the necessity in my mind. The whole world was closing in on the Empire of Japan at this point and their defeat was certain and imminent. It remains a matter of whether it would have cost more lives to wait for that to happen.
No description, no communication. Eight hours left on the clock. And I was so curious about the title, too.
Psshh. Whoever argues for the OT will have a ridiculous advantage. This will be like a Wookiee fighting an ewok.
This debate is straight up catnip for a Star Wars geek. Lovin' it.
Honestly you've both been contributing some interesting and worthy arguments.
I'm not really presenting anything. I thought it was hilarious when I followed your link in the votes tab and before I had a laugh about it I wanted to be reasonably insured against an "oh yeah well that was me numnuts" retort from T1.
Why would they isolate us out of the gajillion people who talk about 9/11 on the internet.
Re: Plagiarism: How do we know Type1 isn't this WinstonC from createdebate?
Srsly Type1, those walls of text are just handing your opponent the grammar and spelling point.
@Smithereens I'm saying if a rapper is as concise as humanly possible and raps about a concept for thirty seconds, and a conventional singer is as concise as humanly possible and sings about a concept for thirty seconds, the rapper will probably have been able to address that concept in more detail or complexity because he simply got to say more. Any argument that the content or meaning of rap music is superior to any other music is of course absurd.