Total posts: 19,931
-->
@Stephen
So... If there is a beginning and an end and they are both God, God is not truly eternal, time is just looped and also thateans free wikl os a lie as is God's omnipotence as God is enslaved to the timeline that repeats.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
What was it referring to?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
If you truly understood what you just agreed with, then you'd know it takes a powerful hero/group to defeat a powerful villain/group.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Mohandas Gandhi was the son of one of the most powerful men in India of his birth region. Gandhi used his power/influence to achieve his goals.
Created:
Posted in:
I wouldn't be opposed to the idea that ghosts, ghouls, alien demigods, vampires and the lile are real and operating in secrecy.
It would furthermore not shock me if they intentionally made modern stories and movies/series depict their mechanics both physically and societally among themselves as a clever concoction of 75% lies and exaggerating with 25% fully accurate as the overall trend (for onstance can vampires last in daylight and be seen in mirrors? How about is it a cursed werewolf or a shapeshifting lycanthrope or a bit of both?) We'll never truly know, even all of them probably know barely anything about some of the others due to distance and what-not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
@Theweakeredge
Let's say you got a very skilled fighter or more, about to either severely damage you or force you to give in to demands unless you obey.
You either need to be (or have present and sided with you) a skilled fighter that can defeat him/her/them or have someone rich, powerful, charismatic and/or smart enough to ensure the fighter is no longer rendered both capable and willing of taking you down.
This analogy applies to so many situations. Power can be, has been and always will be just as defensive as it is offensive.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Do you think linking a piece of reseearch that is playing semantics over what 'power vs control' is, is anything other than proof you don't care what I wrote or even what the research itself concedes?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
That doesn't disprove me.
I would say it's safe to say that people who are good at sustaining power are typically good at managing money but the inverse isn't always true.
Money is a means to an end but because money can be used passively to recycle it in a way that power can't (because not only are we all mortal but people who use power to maintain and gain more power in itself, end up resented by the other powerful people over time and betrayed in the end).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I've heard that before but real life proves this completely wrong. The reason that cliche is able to be falsely believed is that the bad guys make the headlines while the good guys are just another philanthropist millionaire who are assumed to be using their money for good just so they can tell others they are (so others become numb to it).
If it wasn't for rich and/or powerful people using their power and money for good, we'd still be in ancient egyptian and persian style Tyranny. There's a reason that monarchy isn't the worldwide norm anymore (and it's thanks to powerful people, not random people with pitchforks having angry revolts). Even the pinnacle of 'rebellion forcing democracy' which is France, required turncoats among the powerful.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
There is a gangster saying 'you don't really know who a man was until the moment he's gonna die or has to undergo blackmail vs bribery pressure.'
The idea being that according to them, the mark of the 'real G' comes down to whether he caves in when he thinks he has a way out of inevitable defeat.
I think there's perhaps some truth to it but all that's revealed overall is the tendency to be resolutely brave regardless of circumstance.
What really, actually, reveals a man/woman's true character lies in how they handle an abundance of the opposite of death; money and power enabling them to be as free as possible.
Nothing at all reveals someone's true character as when they have the resources and ability to use said resources on a scale no average person can. This is where you truly see who the person actually was all along.
For people born into money, it still applies because their predictable use of it is typically linked to predictable personalities.
Created:
-->
@janesix
Was supposedly born at what point in time? You think he was born at exactly the middle of the start and end of a repeating cycle?
Created:
God is also Satan, this is clearer, the more that one reads between the lines.
Created:
-->
@janesix
Would you care to explain what is meant by this:
Revelation 21:6, KJV: "And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely."
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Blah de blah de blah... Nothing made everything and NASA are the absolute arbiters of truth.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
The error is with your logical processing, not mine.
Created:
I don't understand what he means by that statement. Omega males are basically the very rebellious type who refuse to bow down before the Alpha male, in an overt manner that can at times get them punished, depending on personality clashes and agendas.
Scar in Lion King was a Sigma male while Mufasa was an obvious Alpha. However, a good example of what an Omega Male is, is actually Pumbaa (Timon is more of a beta male). If God is both the rebellious and the man in charge is it true to say God may be Satan himself?
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Wrong. Alpha males protected their pride/pack/tribe from threats both internal and external. It was the alpha male who often friendzoned others and he'd tend to mate primarily only with the alpha female. Promiscuous members tended to be those lower down the food chain who were insecure in their genes lasting and ability to protect their young.
Many females would at times want the alpha male and vice versa with the alpha female but neither would overindulge because they had standards and loyalty. What you are describing is merely a very sexually active Delta male in the hierarchy. Delta males are those that get along with many and easily can get laid a lot by lower ranking females (vice versa is true for delta females). They tend to care very little about who spread the seed more.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
@Barney
@MisterChris
That is not how a mod should carry themselves.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
@MisterChris
@Intelligence_06
Also, on his latest alt, on top of all the shit he usually does racially (this time veiled behind fake friendliness and curiosity) he pretended to be disabled. He presented his case under a pro-incel-subculture thread where he essentially discusses the theory behind eugenics. If not only disability factored in but race too (which he's implied both on that alt in other threads and his other accounts), you can suddenly see how utterly disgusting and immoral he was being even on his latest alt.
Created:
Posted in:
I support the ban on Wylted and Lunatic's behaviour in this thread is only highlighting the issue. Once we think a user should be free to use racial slurs and that anyone who is offended is a sissy, that users can be encouraging low age of consent, transphobia, homophobia and much more shit along those lines (as well as threatening vague powrful officials) and that it all is 'forgiven' because he comes back on an alt account and pretends to be a homosexual Marxist... It's a sign this website's culture is beyond repair, drastically so.
Wylted even bullied me quite often earlier on in his site's usage, he only stopped because I got the mods involved. He compared me to Elliot Rodgers and made a lot of really nasty remarks to me and other users, both on-site and on Discord. I don't like him and frankly I think he's just playing a game here seeing how many he can fool into letting him back, defending him only to humiliate even those who stood by him by the way he carries himself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
This is an accurate trend, I'd say, though there are exceptions. When you're very poor, you tend to grasp at the simplest semblance of religion because you wish it were true (or opt for nihilism in combination with atheism to justify the ruthless acts you do to cope with the Ghetto/slum life).
In my opinion, when people have more time on their hands they can then begin to contemplate reality deeper without too much stress.
This is not always true, you get shallow-thinking wealthy and extremely deep-thinking hobos (term 'hobo' used without perojative tone). I am talking of a trend, not ignoring the anomalies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Gandhi was actually upper class with one of the most powerful men in India at the time as his very own father. He chose to go on hunger strikes.
His father was the actual guy who went from rags to riches, Mohandas (better known as Mahatma) was born with a silver spoon in his mouth no matter how much good he did it's a fact.
Created:
Posted in:
It works the other way around.
Unless you are wired towards psychopathy or sociopathy, the reason you don't want others to suffer is because you don't want to suffer.
For people with Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD), which come in the variants of psychopaths, sociopaths and hybrids (who are between the two), their wanting not to suffer doesn't lead into the not wanting others to suffer. For sociopaths, it actually leads to the opposite (it is them suffering that makes them wish to perpetuate it, sociopaths are nastier when they are suffering). For psychopaths, they want others to suffer no matter what, it's as if others are pure objects to them and they are so sadistic and wired towards it that it wouldn't matter if the psychopath were kept completely content and occupied, they'd still wish to inflict pain and agony onto others.
If this is true, it follows that the reason you want to avoid suffering can't really be because you want others to, instead it's working the other way around. Furthermore, the answer is rooted in psychology, not philosophy. All philosophy accepts that other than masochists, everyone is generally wired towards pleasure and away from pain. Even masochists are wired towards pleasure, it's the 'away from pain' part that is a grey area for them.
When you felt the urge not to take the pill, what you were feeling was anxiety over your dependence on it. What if you were on a desert island after a ship wreck or plane crash? The fact is you'd experience the withdrawal symptoms and it's not a nice thing to admit. However, what may ease your concern is that the people you think exist who function without the medication, either lead very stress-free lives or have medicated themselves with things other than prescribed pills. There's noone who has brutal anxiety attacks that is coping efficiently in a highly demanding environment (which school itself is) without medication. There are people who manage with little to no medication, these people dedicate to low-stress lifestyle, they probably work in a job such as librarian, IT-related work etc where everyday is relative monotony and peace and the only 'pressure' is to meet deadlines that they're warned about far in advance.
I would advise you to avoid situations that require you to be extroverted. I know/knew of someone who has your issues (or something similar) and I do not mean myself, my anxiety isn't to that level of attacks. The person I know of does better when he/she/they is/are able to introspectively process what is going on (as opposed to being hammered with interactions with others nonstop and no time to internally process it). Ironically, this same person is driven towards dealing with people because it helps him/her/them to avoid the nagging, negative inner voice.
It may not be the same for you, what I am also telling you is that this person I know/knew does use medication and there is zero shame in that. In the past people like that were indeed killed off by natural causes at some point (or driven to commit suicide to escape the psychological hell). We aren't all born with biochemistry that helps our brain perfectly balance out.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Undefeatable
Wylted was always a skilled debater. His flaws are to do with character, not skill at debating.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
Expecting honesty from David is a foolish move.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Fuck off comparing me to him. There are lines I would never cross.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
If your question is the habits that someone with a winrate and efficiency such as Oromagi, Ramshutu and Ragnar have followed, do the following:
Disclaimer: I do not personally subscribe to this methodology of debating online, to me it's about more than the stats, it's also about the passion and willingness to lose while putting up a fantastic fight or also in taking a risky topic as the underdog, pushing on a weird path where you twist the burden of proof (maybe via Kritik maybe not) and seeing how well the opponent can handle fighting this.
- Attitude in approach to topic-picking Pick the easy side and debate it as if it is the inferior side. Take the path of least resistance and then treat it as if it is the opposite.
- Approach to 'should I debate?' Do not debate at all if there is no debate that you can truly see the easier side to stack sources and points againt. Filibustering in defense and gish-gallop in offense are mutually your greatest asset, do not underestimate what quantity means in a debate nor how cautious you should be from entering a debate where your opponent's side may end up the one with more points.
- The reason that quantity matters more than quality in arguments... Voters are seeking to easily justify reasons to vote for either side, especially if they can vote for a regular member that they feel good about voting to win (regardless of what they say, this subconscious bias and corruption is always there in all debate websites structured with a victory-via-votes scenario). When you stack many points that are clearly listes/bolded, it starts to matter less what you've written, this is a consistent habit and stylistic preference of all the blood-chillingly high winrate champions of both this website and Debate.Org (Mikal was 100% a specialist in doing this). If you have more points and always ensure to flesh them out with non-plagiarised by reworded generic points from many different sources and places, you start to severely tire your opponent out with rebuttals (or if they don't do this, you can say 'dropped argument hehe' at the closing Round). If your opponent has many points it doesn't matter, you keep focusing on pushing your points through, rebutting matters less than repeating your points, slamming home to the brain of the average voter what to parrot in their RFD. This is not sarcastic or insulting, I spent a lot of time contemplating why debaters who are not necessarily superior at actual debate logic or strategy keep outperforming others who are and this is the biggest thing they do which is counterintuitive to most yet consistently present in their repertoire.
- When rebutting, focus on the source(s). A severely efficient habit of Oromagi, Ramshutu and Ragnar is that when they rebuke points, they rarely invest much effort into proving the opponent wrong. If they can gaslight and discredit your source while backing up their counterclaim with a 'very reliable authority on the subject' they opt to do this and it is not as foolish or shortsighted as you may think. What this does is very similar to why stacking points offensively does matter, it erodes the enemy's energy expenditure equalling the quality of their output. If the opponent is rushing around frantically trying to find a more reliable source and drowning in the character limit choking them away from out-explaining your brutally-sourced simpler point, they start to not just tire but feel desperation, frustration and sadness. These demoralise the opponent and let you keep a cool head as it progresses and this is why point 1 matters so much. You need to be on the side that the mainstream believe, you need to be able to type less and make the opponent need to resort to in-depth explanations of either their conspiracy theories, out-of-left-field Kritiks or deeply intensive constructive point that you didn't realise existed.
- Be sure to master search engine result skim-reading. Your ability to quickly assess which side of a debate can ultimately stack the most well-sourced points is your most invaluable skill if you wish to thrive on DART in the tried and tested manner.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bugsy460
Kritiks work extremely well against medium-skilled debaters who would otherwise know how to fight against your side.
They are often wasted effort vs noob opponents who will simply dismiss the kritik as nonsense and try to force through their side (which can work since voters here aren't all expert debate analysts so ironically their lack of skill can get them the upper hand as you're unsure whether to hardball the Kritik or fight their case which they will have spammed quite a few points onto in frustration at your Kritik).
V.S. very skilled opponents it's dangerous because it opens the door for them to Kritik you back and starts to encourage them to play dirty since you are, whereas if you played nice, most would stick to the predictable route and your fighting fair would be your best path to victory or at least at resisting defeat.
It comes down to the skill of your opponent and the perception in the eyes of voters. If you correctly analyse both, this algorithm is pretty secure on this website. You may think I'm just mediocre at debating but my stats will improve over time, I've been playing a strategy of low effort vs consistent reward in a way almost none of my competition is doing. I understand how to win better than I execute said understanding.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
@Discipulus_Didicit
Ilikepie5 is correct... You are assuming all that ngs regularly burn energy to tend to their fragile biological body that's tiring and burning energy as it functions in a straightforward manner.
To begin to display why ilikepie5 is correct rhat we have no clue of the limits and possibilities, if you knew the typical things about land-based mammals and respiration, you'd never ever believe that dolphins, whales and seals (plus walruses, sea lions etc) function healthily and without severe brain damage and cramps.
If you only knew mammals, the idea of how fish reproduce would be absurd as not only are they using eggs outside of their body but the insemination actually is done by the male directly to the eggs, no actual sex is involved unless we look into some shark species or some extreme exceptions.
We are in a world interpreted through ojr five senses and forms of life evolved to fit this planet's means of providing for life firms within it, with microbial entities as the basis of life here.
If the aliens evolved from non-microbial life in a way that operates extremely different (maybe they can rip their gody apart and reattach it with ease meaning they can teleport parts of themselvea at a time) as well as having something very different to blood, glucose etc as their way of fuelling their operations, it follows that what we consider respiration to be may be very different for them.
Respiration is linked to dependency on constant energy, some alien species may have the capacity to essentially store massive battery charges of energy that then lets them not respirate for a while. Salmon actually do this, it's done especially hy Canadian salmon amdnis how they famously leap out of water in the way they do that lets bears catch them. During this trip they suffocate themselges by essentially being on ansuicide mission to travel superfast without cramps so they reach the destination and are in a safer environment to have offspring and then die.
It's probably true that respiration, as in the conversion of energy into a form that the lifeform can use, is there for alien lfieforms hut if this battery charge mechanism is in place (for instance) it already is much more feasible for them to be suffocating naked in outer space (if they're able to stand the conditions) and remain alive. If this is actually viable it starts to change how dangerous and effective they can be at dominating other planets, especially if they aren't perceptible to our five senses (though I think they'll always be perceptible to touch). There's also the idea that rhey are demigods of sorts. Demigod aliens may genuinely be personalities that aren't respirating, just operating on immortal consciousness.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
@MisterChris
@fauxlaw
In this website I am almost 100% sure that your unique identifying label/factor/item is your e-mail address. The reason I am quite certain of this is that the URL for profiles is /username (not /userIDnumber) and your username is able to be changed, though they don't offer that much.
This means the only things which can be uniquely identifying, to attach the entire account to, are either their place in a database with a separate key we don't see, or the username. There is possibly a third thing which is the default profile image, since that's unique per account on this website but I really doubt it's coded that way because that means he can never ever change that, which doesn't seem wise to design a website with/around.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
I am confused, nothing you wrote had anything to do with anything I wrote. You wrote something about your life then out of nowhere stated some nonsense like implying that Trump isn't aged and showing many signs of mental decline with some remark made to Biden, who you and I both agree is aging and barely fit for office.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
It was him or Trump. I'm perfectly satisfied with which of the two was elected. That said, I'd have rathered anothr Dem candidate, preferably a younger, fitter one (maybe Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren, even Andrew Yang would do though I don't hate machines as much as him) who isn't a significantly aged person who should soend their life resting, AKA Trump and Biden.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Undefeatable
They debate like mice and treat debating like a science, be a wolf and master your artform.
Created:
-->
@Bringerofrain
Her reply is more relevant to the thread than yours. You are the one trolling her.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bringerofrain
3 and 5 I'd support outright banning. I feel 4 could be interesting if the woman-defender is allowed to bite back at how males have often ruined their own progress because of their hostility and impulsivity and stuff like that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bringerofrain
You recently made a topic supporting incels (or mocking them, I'm not sure which I just noticed the title and knew it was too offputting of a topic to touch)... Anyway, I agree to the notion of this but I think topics 1 and 2 are not too taboo depending on the context. I agree with 3-5 being no-gos. I understand it can be entertaining to be devil's advocate but exactly as this can have real world impact I have come to understand as I've grown up, why censorship is needed in moderation (pun intended).
Created:
Posted in:
There was never an era where consent was assumed, you literally can't assume consent of conscious beings who clealry indicate they aren't comfortable with what's happening. What changed was that in disgustingly masculine era and cultures such as the brutal 1500s of Samurai Japan and such, there was no concern whatsoever paid to the consent of women. If you fancied making a woman into your concubine, you took her by force or sliced her head and even her children's heads (or the head of a man close to her) until she caved in non-consensually. That is how cruel historical humans have been to women and children.
Masculinity, if it is too high in any environment or culture, is severely toxic to all involved. This is why all-boys schools are far more psychologically harmful for males than all-girls schools are for females (proven by several different studies into how each affects students through to adulthood).
We need to become more empathetic and caring to one another if we want to better the world.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
You're blocked for a reason. Stop using biology as an excuse. You know what is actually involuntary and biological? The PTSD and other hormonal alterations in the brain of the victim of such harassment. They feel genuine deep fear walking into work every day.
Real alpha males don't sexually harass women. Those are mutations of what an alpha male is. Real alpha males beat the shit out of such people and protect the weak in their tribe/clan. That's what the real alpha male is in original human caveman hierarchy. Alpha males prey on predators, those lower down prey on others.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bringerofrain
Russians were involved with Trump getting elected, it's an objectively proven fact but how they went about doing it was less physical and more psychological. While they may have used secret agents and manipulated some things behind the scenes, it's more likely and definitely proven that their primary (if not sole) line of attack was to combine forces with Wikileaks and use fake social media accounts along with Julian Assange re-attacking Clinton just a few months before the election so that everything the average American citizen came across online made them feel Clinton was at best a lesser evil and at worst the devil in human form. They also went about helping Trump launch a subtle attack on people's psychological willingness to vote Clinton but altering the type of targeted political ads that appeared to different demographics and Facebook profiles. There were even physical letters sent to homes, not just social media ads.
There were essentially four categories:
- Likes Trump but doesn't mind Clinton (especially if Caucasian)
- Doesn't care about either (especially if African American)
- Dislikes Trump with a passion but is unsure about Clinton (especially if African American)
- Loves Clinton but sees some benefit in Trump.
All four were targeted were targeted with a separate strategy of personalised letters, ads etc. This is absolutely proven and was only discovered recently prior to this 2020 Election in fact (because of people themselves revealing what was sent and being curious about it as well as Facebook itself revealing something to do with it when it got sued itself for spying on people and selling the data).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
@Barney
@MisterChris
When a user has had their ability to report things removed, it still appears to the user as if they can physically report votes on debates. This results in them genuinely clicking it and it changing to 'cancel report' as if it's gone through yet nothing is received in the system. I know this because of an incident that arose with MisterChris' vote. You can thank me later.
Created:
Posted in:
Younger people are especially invulnerable to Covid when coupled with vaccination. The disease is uniquely merciful to the young (more so than ANY virus before this seems to specifically target the elderly in a disproportionate manner, when it comes to how harsh it hits). There is something about the virus that younger immune systems seem extremely capable of adapting to and eliminating. It's relatively safe to open up schools again post-vaccination, so long as none of them are children of anti-vaxxers as this risks them reinfecting the school-population.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
The media has been far too easy on Biden. The problem is that this election in particular was between two elderly men who have both shown signs of mental decline linked with their aging. Consequently, it came down to which of the two was the lesser evil in the media's eyes since you either hated or loved Trump and badly wanted Biden to lose or win (depending on if you loved or loathed Trump).
Most Media outlets saw Trump as the greater evil and opted to side with Biden (even Fox News was forced to turn on Trump at the end because the idiot did what he did). The other problem is that Biden has had a very hard life with regards to losing 2 children, one very recently. The media is scared to be seen as pushing on a kind elderly man who has had it hard in life but it is indeed wrong of them not to be at least moderately grilling him with questions and constructive criticism.
I hope that this 'soft spot for Biden' slowly erodes and he is held accountable. So far, he is doing a decent job as President but that doesn't excuse him from scrutiny, rather it means he is self-scrutinising well enough for now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bringerofrain
As a rule almost all known Populists in the past that aren't rabid Communist Tyrants are typically disguising pushing for the interests of their donors (and only their donors, sometimes with a racist agenda attached) as being 'revolutionary anti-establishment' non-sellouts.
I hope this clears things up for you.
As time progressed, Populists became more moderate in general but still follow this pattern of behaviour and ethos. I'm sure there are exceptions, they are rare.
Created:
Right-Wing ethos is inherently self-defeating. You cannot be the freer, wealthier nation in terms of your populace if your people are enslaved by the rich and left with even less than they'd have if left-wing ethos were in place.
They are quick to point out that pure Socialism tends to fail and mutates into brutal Communism. What they fail to see is that even moderate right-wing societies end up with extreme poverty, since no matter how right-wing it starts off, once the rich are left to snowball their wealth and power, they do so infinitely until the entire nation's enforcement of law (regardless of actual written law) is centred around their personal and financial benefit/preference.
This happens always, every single time in every continent that embraced Capitalism in its unfettered form. It only gets successfully undone long-term through a shift to the left and Social Democracy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
I'm not, anyone can scroll up and see. You are going out of your way to piss me off but all you've achieved is to show your own 'easy way out' and me not taking the bait.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Easy out is saying you are entitled to sexually harass someone or defend Trump for doing it because another user on a website believes reality has simulated origins.
Created:
-->
@Bringerofrain
Mhmm doesn't do much though, not saying it isn't worth taking. A huge portion of people are vitamin D deficient at the moment by the way, due to lockdown. I take a supplement but that's not what overall helped my mood, it does slightly boost energy levels though (very slightly).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Because pain is real in a simulation. You and I being simulated is irrelevant within the simulation.
Created: