Ehyeh

well, i think its best to remember that nothing outside of the universe exists. The universe is everything so nothing exists outside of itself. The expansion of the universe can simply be viewed as the stretching of space. since space is everything, it doesn't stretch into anything but itself, this highlights two propositions (1) the universe is infinite or (2) laps back on itself. In case 1, it could be described as Somewhat like if we bounce on a trampoline it spreads out and closes back in depending on the force put  upon the trampoline, but the amount of material on the trampoline never increases or decreases. All that increases and decreases is how stretched out whatever is already there is. In this same sense the universe is never stretching or going into anything new, but stretching what is already there, like the trampoline. It may be that space simply is literally bending into itself. 

If the universe is indeed infinite, then the simple answer is that the universe doesn't have anything to expand into. A good analogy can be made with math. Imagine you have a list of numbers, 1,2,3,etc all the way up to infinity. Then you multiply every number in this list by 2, so that you now have 2,4,6 etc all the way up to infinity. The distance between the numbers in your list has "stretched" (it is now 2 instead of 1), but can you really say that the total extent of all your numbers has expanded? probably not, because in the end it all leads to infinity again anyways.  So there is still stretching but you still end up with the same total.

If your flat Earth theory was correct, It should take significantly longer to fly to New Zealand from Chile than it would be to fly from Chile to the UK. Yet if we google flight times from these nations, it takes 14 hours to go from Chile to the UK and 12 hours to go from Chile to New Zealand. This can only be accounted for if the earth is round. This should be impossible if the earth was flat, right? 

- 

To put that into perspective, it takes 23 hours to go from the UK to new Zealand. Are we having 1 million fake fuel stops? whats going on here?

If the Greeks guessed the shape and size of the Earth (despite using maths), would you not say your belief in NASA lying is an even bigger guess? I would probably wager you haven't done the mathematics proving the earth is flat and that we live within an ice wall through any real observable nor mathematically sound manner.

Is it? they seem pretty confident that space is not moving into anything or expanding into nothing. The only explanation is space is getting bigger within itself, otherwise we necessarily contradict.

So you believe everyone in NASA, the government, even ancient Greek philosophers who deciphered that the earth was spherical, these thousands upon thousands of people are simply lying to you? I mean, Occam's razor would suggest it's quite unlikely. Not just that, I'm just curious about what exactly they gain from lying to you in this manner. All the science that appears to check out and is all metaphysically possible, is likely false?

Yeah, space isn't expanding into anything beyond itself per se, its simply that the distance already contained within itself is getting bigger within itself.

It could be said to be expanding into itself. 

I'd probably put you in hufflepuff.

I would like to be in Gryffindor more than raven claw.

I think God is provable through ones own self consciousness. As an extension of this, i believe morality is objective and Mortem and i can prove it.  Mortem or I plan on maybe opening up a god debate in the future on the matter. You should read into menos paradox. 

Yeah, that was the heavy hitting argument wasn't it. Its literally a description talking about what a universal is, not an argument that was plagiarised. I also got it from my description in another debate, i always assume most things are copy and pasted in such sections regardless if they're cited or not.

All you've been saying is that yes, I've only had 10 hard debates on this site, but its not as bad as it seems! You're saying what im saying but making it look better by naming out the 10 debaters in the last 6 years or so.

My actual argument was not plagiarised, from the encyclopedia. Nowhere on the encyclopedia does it say consciousness is a universal. The bit you said i plagiarised was copy and pasted from my DESCRPTION in my universals debate and simply worked as a way for you and readers to understand my ACTUAL subsequent argument. You barely "argued" against anything. That wasn't even my argument, the consciousness one is. That shit falls apart in two words next round.

You've debated 3. Rationalmadman, whiteflame and intelligence. One of them you lost and another rationalmadman just forfeited. Who else in the top 10 have you debated? You have 1 none padded debate a year.  Regarding our debate, i just wanted a good discussion on the topic, especially considering your hubris of considering it nonsense. Although i didnt expect you to be so much of a sophist before going into it. You're very well aware yourself of how slimy and dishonest your arguments are, which has just took all the enjoyment out of what could of been an enlightening discussion. Although you did attempt to rig the debate as much as possible in your favour, that is correct, yes. If the debate was fair you wouldn't of debated me. Which not only shows how fortified and padded your record is but also your ego, unfortunately. 

I definitely think whiteflame can be beat. All of his debates seem to be more politics/science orientated. I think he would struggle on more philosophical topics. We all have our pros and cons. Ossa appears very promising. 

Literally everyone in the top 10 with the exception of Benjamin and whiteflame have extremely padded records.  That's why whiteflame wont be surpassed on this site for a very long time.

That's true, you were the first to do it. You have over 100 debates. About 10 at absolute max are legitimate debates. If we're being cruel only 5 are. More than 1 in 10 of your debates are borderline rigged either through you vsing someone like mall (and farming them intentionally for elo) or vs someone you know will forfeit. 

embrace utilitarianism.

When novice surpasses you on the leaderboard through this strategy, you may find your answer. What novice is doing would be somewhat like me and a friend on League of Legends in high elo games intentionally giving one another wins to climb the ladder. I'm dubious about Mall "consenting" to this. Lets be honest, he's either a troll or mentally deficient. In case 1 of mall being a troll it then would not be fair for Novice to be getting free wins from someone griefing debates. If its true mall is mentally deficient, he is then incapable of consenting to these debates to begin with.

We should always want DART to continue growing as long as the new users aren't trolls but looking for good faith resolutions. If trolling and bad faith debates are a problem. That already is one as some of the people in the top 10 are bad faith debaters who just strawman and use dirty tactics. What is there to lose?

whether work from home is better for you as an employee or your business depends on a lot of things. There's many jobs ive seen where i would hate to go to the office which I've been too (in interviews). Other times I've loved to go to the office. Its all about the distance and people there. Sometimes the change of scenery is important for ones mental health. In my most recent job i really enjoyed my office, i would sometimes ride there on a bike it was so close (within 5 miles), so i got some nice exercise and sunlight. 

Yeah but what ads you get is decided based on the vids you watch. If im watching gaming related stuff i will get gaming related ads. If i watch stock bro stuff i will get scams for ads. If i watch debate based content i SHOULD get debate based ads but i don't! we neeeeed to hit our target audience. They exist! 

YouTube ads got me addicted to league of legends for 4 years of my life (I've been clean for a year, thank god). I think YouTube ads would do wonders if it hits enough electronic devices.

Get this shit fuckin rolling. It has all the hallmarks to properly blow up, but it hasn't! 

DART needs better advertising. Although its much cleaner than DDO (at least in its latter years) it still doesn't have many active members. Can we not put some goddamn YouTube ads up or something?

What an excuse. Danielle was rank 1 on DDO way back in 2012. Are you saying people are more sexist in 2022 then they were in 2012? make some debates, stop lying to yourself that anyone gives two sh*ts about your gender.

nah you're right. He never "debated" in any sort of way we do it in the modern day.

Debating styles have changed. Its completely impossible to use the Socratic method in the way debates are conducted nowadays. Socrates also never "debated" ideas. He would almost never argue any sort of point himself but turn someone else's on them. In reality that is the main reason he was killed, he would never give an opinion of his own and let people use the Socratic method on him, people seen his as a deceptive smart ass because of it. I couldn't go into a debate on abortion tomorrow and simply point out the flaws in their system without proposing an alternative, people would understandably think im being in poor conduct and a bad debater for it.

No, they need to prove the senses reliable to be certain of materialism and therefore saying God cannot exist. Not all atheists are hypocrites. Only those who say there is no god/gods. Although even if materialism were true god could still exist, he would just be less needed it seems.

When did i say an atheist has to prove God doesn't exist? that isn't the topic of stipulation.

So whenever i want to talk on a subject am i ought to bring up every other subject on the planet? when i talk about how children should be provided for must i also talk about how donkeys must be provided for too? how about the elderly? the disabled? we cant miss them out. In the end this goes on ad infinitum. If i point out the flaws in christianity should i do it too islam and all other religions too? do you really see that as realistic? i don't have enough TIME to sit here talking about every topic on the planet.

Well if someone disagrees with metaphysical solipsism being the most likely, they were free to show me why. None of them did. I also don't hold theists or atheists to any sort of standards, what others do is none of my business as long as it isn't malicious.  I was simply pointing out some atheists are indeed hypocrites.

And almost all of those beliefs you have will have things left out, Once we stop synthesising new ideas (Hegel) we will eventually attain that old man status of "being stuck in his ways".

People massively overestimate dunning kruger. Many people on the lower scale decently overestimate how well they will do but they still rank themselves significantly below top achievers. Just look at the graph in the wiki you linked. highest achievers are very well aware of how good they do and even think they did amazing. Humility in my eyes is only acceptable in defeat, not in any other part of your life as it will make you a complacent loser.

Its got nothing to do with how my current skill is, Michael. Regardless of my deficits, they can all be overcome. I'm not ignoring them, i learn constantly. My goal isn't even to get on the top 10 leaderboard. Most of my losses are forfeits or debating silly things. What im really saying is in 10 years ill have the capacity to beat anyone on most topics.

You're a determinist Michael. Determinists will forever limit their potential.

Michael. Dunning kruger effect doesn't work here, as i said i haven't been gifted whatsoever intellectually. I've said my mindset is better than most of humanities. 

Just one month ago, i used to believe trans women were women. 4 months ago, i believed universals didnt exist. 1 month ago, i was a hardcore determinist (realised i need to stop being a loser). 2 weeks ago i used to believe abortion should be decided based when a  fetus attains first conscious experience. There's so much more. I cant imagine anyone else develops their ideas continuously as much as me on such a wide array of subjects.

-

When was the last time you changed your mind on one single topic? 2 years ago?

Because of my mindset. I change my mind more than anyone else on this site. I actually learn things frequently from debates, i've come to notice this is a rare occurrence for most people.

What you truly see is someone with sheer willpower, determination and confidence. 

What's point? I don't care if I had 1000 losses and 2 wins. It doesn't change a thing, Shila. I know who I am. I know what I'm capable of and what I'm not. I'm not riddled with doubt, fear, and anxiety like most of humanity is.

You're a quitter shila. With your mindset you wont be able to accomplish such a feat, but you could if you changed your perspective on life.

I'm aware of the law of non contradiction. I just want an example of a logical absolute beyond time, space etc. I would argue no intellectual processes are beyond time and space as its a contradiction to even have a thought if time/space didn't exist as there's nothing to have thoughts in or to allow thoughts.

Can you name one of these absolutes?

who are "the best debaters?" the top 10 on each ones leaderboard? if it was site vs site DDO would destroy DART simply through having 20x the members. That being said, if its top 10 vs top 10 i think it would be pretty even. Although id probably still give it DDO with an active Danielle and bluesteel. Oromagi isn't going to carry, hes used to debating Hunter Bidens laptop and keeping up with the Kardashians.

-----

With that being said, me in 10 years beats the top 10 of both DDO and DART by myself, my ability for evolution and growth is the best on the planet. 

I would say my theistic beliefs are pretty out of the ordinary, wouldn't you say so? with being an atheist, there is no flavours too it, you either are one or you aren't. There's many different kinds of theism. I imagine that's why it sounds weird when you reverse the roles?

I'm a pantheist. I dont really understand what you're saying! potentially rephrase it so my small brain can comprehend your poetic vernacular.

As long as something is metaphysically possible you cant rule it out. Its just as dead as a nail that atheists constantly go on about how God is not proven therefore why believe? like, most people know this, what's your point? people aren't machine algorithms which only believe what is the most likely. We have emotions and build beliefs off pragmatism too. im also quite the unconventional theist compared to most.

The best strategy with crypto is undoubtedly to by high and dump when low. I've had lots of success.