Total posts: 5,875
Posted in:
1% to 50% to 100%
Less than 50% being partisan leftist,
nearer 50% being balanced,
and more than 50% being rightist partisan.
Tell us how you rate these news organizations. Here are my ratings. Remove my numbers and place your own.
MSNBC = 0.5%
CNN = 20%
FOX = 65%
BBC = 40%
Brtbart = 80%
How right/wrong am I?
Created:
-->
@Beelzedad
Yeah, you have more than denials and ad-hom.
Doctor, heal thyself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@1harderthanyouthink
I for one would oppose AirMax ever being a mod here, and I would encourage the Gentle Readers from DDO to do the same, not that they would need much encouragement.
Other than having his buddy as mod again, I haven't a clue why bsh1 is so insistent on AirMax modding here. We aren't in a crisis, what is the urgency? What is the need?
An easy test would be to take a post from bully or hari from DDO, post it here, and let's see if Mike's opinion would agree with what AirMax did in actuality.
I run the risk of having his friends accuse me of hate, but I'm more interested in the success of this site than I am of what they think of me right now.
They are acting like this site is DDO2. It isn't. It is its own site. DebateArt.com There is no reason Mike needs to accept a mod hoisted on him by DDO refugees.
Let the man run his site.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@1harderthanyouthink
The obsession with Islam from some people is staggering.
With the peaceful believers of Islam bombing and stabbing them in the streets, one wonders why.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
I am a strong advocate for religious freedom,.....
As long as the religion is not Christianity.
but I can't help but hear "religious privilege" when I hear the words in this context.
Yeah. Was the task force to defend Islamic freedom, you would be all for it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
For some here, that is a positive thing.And lets not forget the obvious and common thread running through this story and the cause of this tragic episode is islam.
Created:
-->
@linate
I agree. Non of those things were racist.
The reason I don't think Trump is racist is because he has not done anything racist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Beelzedad
I will respond when I see fit.
Argumentation is not ad-hom. If you think you were insulted in my previous response, a debate site will be hard for you.
And disagreement is not "denial". This is debate, disagreements are par for the course. I agree with reasoned arguments, not just strongly held opinions.
If all you are looking for agreement and a safe space, please don't bother to respond.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Relative to what, cherubim and seraphim?Anne Hathaway, relatively unattractive.....
This article shows what every guy already knows, and what women refuse to see even when told.
But there are things individuals of each gender can do so as to be exceptions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Beelzedad
No they don't.
First, you have to interpret cave drawing as "monsters" andvthenvassume these "monsters" were part of a cultural story. That my friend is pure guessing based an assumption.
I can see from your name why you would need monster stories to predate gods and religions, but that is just not true. The closest thing to a "monster" in some cultures would be a swiftly moving river or an active volcano.
Monsters came later.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ravensjt
Hey Raven. I see you made it. Cool pic. Would have loved to have listened to that convo.
Created:
-->
@Buddamoose
How do you personally feel about Jews?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
If you will not read my posts there will be no reason for me to respond to you. Let me correct you.
Many cultures do not have monster stories.
Could you give examples. I am not aware any exist.
Many African cultures, and Eskimo cultures did not develop monsters. Where do you get the idea that every culture had monster stories? Because they are so common in your culture?
Yes, monsters and gods aren't the only possibilities, which is part of the reason why it is so significant that everyone chose god.
Again, and I realize this is a point you dispute (through assertion), but "everyone" did not choose god. eg. Piraha
Even if I were to grant you the Piraha, one culture out of all that have existed would not bother my claim.
Additionally, there are modern cultures in which god stories have little or no place.
I don't think you're using the word "culture" correctly.
So, all cultures 'coming up with god stories' is wonky and not a stable foundation for the conclusion.
"Wonky" is a precise argument.
I know you would like to only consider original god stories, but you nor I know where the "original god story" ends and the mishmash begins.
I do. For example, we know the story of a ressurection of a god man is not native to the Japanese. We have records of much of the history of these cultures.
I'm not sure we even know where the original god stories begin!
There is no "original" god story. Every culture had one.
So, there will be no quarter given for 'original god stories' as opposed to god stories in general.
I need no quarter given. You either accept truth or you don't. It's no skin off my nose.
In addition to these stumbling blocks, every culture shares things we know to be harmful or detrimental. Rape, hatred, ignorance,... etc.
So? Are you confused?
All cultures sharing something does not make that thing desirable.
No one has said it did. You are confused. Read slowly if that helps you.
Some humans creating god stories does not equate to a need for god much less the actual existence of a god.
Well, it's not some humans, it every culture.
There are much better arguments for god.
This is not an argument for god. But not to worry, I know the futility of getting an anti-theist off his "god does not exist" knee jerk.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
Monster stories are universal in the same way as god stories.
Only in your dreams. Many cultures do not have monster stories. They are certainly not universal.
Yes, monsters and gods aren't the only possibilities, which is part of the reason why it is so significant that everyone chose god.
Today, many cultures have incorporated facets of other cultures in their god stories, so I'm talking about original stories, not the mishmash we have now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SamStevens
You misunderstand me Sam.
There is stupid, and then there is stupid. The movie sets up the universe. OK, I'm willing to accept that universe, but you have to be true to it. But no, they will set up a universe, and then violate the very universe they themselves set up.
Professor X can control minds but is inexplicably helpless in the most mundane of situations.
If the stupidity flows from the character or the plot, OK, but to have a character strong enough to crush Ironman's headgear, but is helpless when he's holding ironman's head is silly.
The success of movies is due to what I call the porn effect. The public eats it up because nothing better is out there. The movies are financial successes, but that doesn't point to intelligence of the film maker. Every blockbuster is stupid.
Matrix was a movie that tried hard not to be stupid. They stayed pretty true to the universe they set up. Movies do not have to be stupid.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Smithereens
No, no, no. People do stupid things in real life. And even smart people get killed in reality, but that is different from the stupidity of movies.
It is possible to get the tension and suspense without the stupidity. It lazy writing, and knowing that the audience won't care either way.
Trump isn't embarrassing America, our silly movies are.
Created:
Posted in:
That was because AirMax let the board degrade with trolls. The politics board was like a KKK convention. Traffic began to die long before there was a spam problem. The religion board kept the racist at bay with unity. But just barely.
Maybe Juggle liked the traffic and prohibited AirMax from banning anyone, but in that situation I would have banned hari and given up the job. Nothing is worth my integrity.
Mike here is not an american, and may not have the American sensibility of how vile racism is, but I really hope he doesn't let Dart become just like all the other racist infected boards on the net.
The success of this site is not a given.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Lol. High fashion during the time the painting was made.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Stephen, when he says things like that, just copy debateArt.com in your response. Let the mod see the trollish behavior.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Stephen, when he says things like that, just copy debateArt.com in your response. Let the mod see the trollish behavior.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SamStevens
So we get stupid movies because film makers are intelligent enough to realize the general public is stupid?
I find it easier to believe that we get stupid movies because film makers are stupid, and the general public ever more stupid.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
Very true.
And now that the Hillery collusion details are coming out, we see it was even worse, the media, a political party, and the FBI and Justice departments were in collusion to nullify an election.
The greatest danger to this country is not terrorists, global warming, or ICE, it's stupid Americans.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Take note of when an atheist is honest and need not play the "block god just in case this is a ploy to argue him" game. Fear makes people do strange things.Is a painting (of Mona Lisa quality) itself proof of the existence of a painter?"Yes.
Thank you Castin.
It surprised me to find out that painting was a footnote in art history until 1911
I've never thought it was that great of a painting. I used it because it is famous to the layman too. They say it's fame is due to the subtle smile on her face. Eh.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
No. But it helps if you read the thread.Do we have monster stories because there are actually cyclops, dragons, or wolf men?
Are monster stories universal to every culture across all time? No. Only the god story is that way.
God stories are universal, they are universal because cultures see the pattern in nature. There is the pattern in nature because there is actually a god.
Stories of god does not suggest a human desire for god as much as a human desire for answers.
And then every culture comes up withe same answer? Can coincidence account for that? Can chance?
Humans do want answers, and if god did not answer those questions, he would have been abandoned. The error of atheists is that they think the "answers" humankind is searching for are scientific answers.
Being materialists, they can conceive of no other answers.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
The weather does not need to be serene all the time, just serene within the memory of individuals. And there are many places like that.
My comment was to show that natural catastrophes did not cause god stories. God stories would have occurred anyway.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
@vagabond
Sorry, I don't feed trolls.
You just are one.
What you mean and have always meant is that you can't handle the information I supply and certainly can't answer any of my questions honestly. You just release your anger when the lies you tell are confronted by me and you simply can't respond. I feel sorry for you.
Stalking. Reported.
Created:
-->
@David
Do you think Israel is an "occupying force?" On Palestinian land?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Tell me why. It cannot be.Except i believe it is.
A painting is created by a painter.
Not married is not created by a bachelor.
A woman or a platypus can be unmarried.
You have far too much faith in what you believe. Things are not true simply because you believe them.
If A, then B
A, therefore B
Logical no?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
She is a straight out hero no doubt, but the OP says "badass" and I don't think Sendler was badass. But she is a hero of sterling moral integrity. It is amazing that hero's of this calibre exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Smithereens
I read this thread expecting the OP to go down the usual "therefore a creation requires a creator"
And I bet your knee-jerk bone was cocked and ready.
but its actually ethang just insisting that paintings require painters. You gotta give that one to him folks lol.
An atheist disappointed that the topic didn't allow him to once again turn this thread into a "God does not exist" diatribe.
I'll do better next time smith. Keep your knees jerked.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
God stories preceded natural catastrophes. And the exist where the weather is always serene and kind.We had a flood because the river god is mad. There has been a drought because the sun god is unhappy. Etc. Etc.
No other phenomena qualifies. We have god stories because there is a god. There is no intrinsic human need for nonexistent things. If the human desire for god is genetic, then something in the environment caused that desire to develop. This is a fact of evolution.
Created:
Posted in:
In movies Sam. In movies.
In movies, everyone in the chase have guns.
No one ever shoots out the tires,
NP one shoots the driver.
And the damage left by the chase is worse than what the criminal did in the beginning.
Why do otherwise intelligent film makers use this silly gimmick?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Ah. Honesty. Humility. Truth.I fell for the hype.
The more expensive phone was not better. The hype was.
But next time there aint no way in hell I will buy another Iphone. I hate it.
What if all the cool stars in Hollywood own one? Then you'll buy another right?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
The whole stem of your complaints is that he isn't doing enough. He obviously still has admin abilities, but doesn't use them as frequently as he once did because the site was left to hell by the developers.
Thanks for belatedly admitting the truth.
He doesn't owe the site the activity you think he does, this was always a hobby for him.
It doesn't matter what it was for him, if he accepted the position, the duties of that position was his responsibility.
Not a paid position.
Again, it doesn't matter. He accepted the position without pay (this has not been established) so no pay does not free him from the responsibilities of the position.
Your claim that people left because of the moderator is completely untrue.
My claim is that people left because the poor moderation allowed the site to become unfriendly. That is true.
Maybe it's the reason you left, but if it is, it's a piss poor reason.
I left because the site was no longer usable.
More likely you came here because the spam, and are using Max as a scapegoat to blame your problems on.
The spam at DDO is not my problem, as such, I don't need to blame it on anyone.
That's fine, your poorly formed and badly substantiated opinion of him is shadowed by the horde of other members who respected Max for everything he did for the site over the years.
Hitler was popular.
I spoke to Airmax today. The childish taunts of being afraid or having an agenda are below you.Did you ask him if I knew him?
No. I don't care if you know him. It is obvious that it was not true that he had resigned.
These aren't taunts, you are literally calling me a liar and saying I don't know him.
No sir. I don't care if you know him. You obviously don't know him as well as you wanted us to believe. He was a poor mod, and how well you know him cannot change that.
Re-activating closed accounts is an admin function.Duh, what's your point?
That you were wrong when you said he had resigned his admin duties.
No site would allow someone who " owes them nothing" to have access to their admin functions.Juggle did.
Untrue. And your record of being correct on things like this is pitiful.
They didn't want to do the work so they were lucky Max enough was kind enough to do it for them for free for all these years.
Then they certainly got their money's worth.
Max owes nothing to us, or them, and can stop moderating at anytime he pleases.
As long as he is mod, the responsibilities of the job are his. If he cannot or will not do them, he should resign.
Max is not evil or a douchebag. He just did not moderate very well.And you continuously fail to make a good case for this,...
The smoking wreck that is DDO does that adequately.
If you decide you actually want to back this up, feel free to challenge me to debate on this, we can go over all the evidence and let the voters decide.
Why would I debate you on something so trivial and silly? I need no vote to have an opinion. He was a terrible mod. He may have been a good friend, but his moderation was lacking.
The site is up. Why are you here?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
As atheists are wont to knee-jerk, he began by thinking I was attempting to establish the Christian God. But for my argument, the particular god is immaterial. It is clear from the universality of the belief, that the patterns exist in reality.
It is then impossible to call it superstition. Was it superstition when scientists believed in blood letting? Superstitions cannot be real in the actual world.
So whether you conclude a deistic god, a poly god, or a specific god, my point is that he exists, which is why every culture has seen his pattern in nature and come up with virtually the same story.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Well, in response to your question I said "I do not believe this is the case" which you "interpreted" as "yes."
No sir. I interpreted your observation that calling something a painting presumes the existence of a painter. That is a yes.
If calling something a painting presumes the existence of a painter, then a painting is itself proof of the existence of a painter. You are the one choosing your words. I will take the words you use.
All I'm asking is that you stop doing this. I don't think it is an unreasonable request.
It is highly unreasonable. I will not stop taking your words for what they are. Words have meaning. If you mean something else, choose different words.
I believe the painter/painting relationship to be tautological.
OK, but that doesn't stop a painting from being evidence of a painter. And this is the result of believing illogical things. A painting is NOT to a painter, the way 'not married' is to a 'bachelor.'
Sorry, but Ethan sides with logic every time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Dude, if calling something a painting presumes the existence of a painter, then a painting is itself proof of the existence of a painter.Is a painting itself proof of the existence of a painter?Calling something a painting presumes the existence of a painter.
This is logic 101.
I didn't do it for you.I'd appreciate it if you didn't "interpret" my answers for me
If you think I'm saying yes when I am explicitly saying no, then I am going to bow out of this conversation.
You are free to do as you wish, but I will go by your words. If you meant no, perhaps you should have said no. As it is, you said yes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TwoMan
No. An animal could possibly knock a can of paint on a canvas.
This is true. I once saw an elephant paint.
Unless one is willing to say that an unwitting animal is a painter, there are scenarios that can be conceived of where the answer is no.
OK.
You might also need to more clearly define the word "painting".
You are right. OK, something most would agree that only a human could do. Like the Mona Lisa.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Why do you have to go to pompeii to see statues that have no sculptor?
Pompeii has had a moratorium on sculptors?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
No. If my answer was "yes" then I would have said "yes." I'd appreciate it if you did not answer on my behalf.
I was not answering on your behalf, I was interpreting your answer. And your answer is yes.
To say that one thing is proof of another (to me) is to say you can deduce the existence of the latter from the former.
Exactly.
I do not believe this is the case with the painter and the painting. To me, a painting, definitively requires a painter (or otherwise it isn't a painting).
Exactly. Again, your answer is yes.
It's like asking: "Does a bachelor itself proof he isn't married?" It's a bit of a weird question.
It may be an unusual question, but it is logically valid. It isn't a perfect example because a bachelor and not married are not two independant things like a painting and a painter.
Likewise, to call something a painting is to declare the existence of a painter at the same time, rather than using the existence of a painting to then separately conclude there must be a painter.
It's the same thing.
I don't think this is a trivial thing, either. To say a painting proofs the existence of a painter permits the following syllogism:1. Paintings proof the existence of painters.2. This is a painting.3. Ergo there is a painter.To mean, the existence of a painter is bound in the definition of what a painting is, which would make the entire thing a tautology, rather than some novel argument.
I disagree. It isn't tautology. Its one thing implying the existence of something else. Perhaps you don't know the definition of tautology?
Created:
Posted in:
What sense do they make?
Why don't they shoot out the tires?
What would they do if they caught the car they are chasing? Both parties have guns.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Do you think just anyone has access to a moderator account?
You said he had resigned. He had not. The closed accounts are not "connected to him". He just has admin rights to open those accounts. He has
I spoke to Airmax today. The childish taunts of being afraid or having an agenda are below you. Re-activating closed accounts is an admin function.
No site would allow someone who " owes them nothing" to have access to their admin functions. There is no need to be so dramatic. Max is not evil or a douchebag. He just did not moderate very well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Ok.
But none of them have to be true. Just like 5 eyewitnesses telling what happened at a wedding, each may get something wrong, but there was a wedding.
Every culture seeing something in nature to come up with a similar god concept, he is creator of the world, more powerful than man, is not subject to time, creator of life, knows the future, knows our thoughts....
They may get some small part wrong, but there definitely is a god.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
>4. Belief in god-concepts falls into the category of superstitious beliefs.
This is where your argument fail. Your categorization is ad-hoc with out justification.
>5. This is why humans have developed god-concepts.
No. Every culture developed a strikingly similar god concept because they all recognized the patterns for god's existence in nature.
Rom 1:19 - because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
Rom 1:20 - For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
Created: