Discussion in 'Debates & Contests' started by E_Pluribus_Venom, Jul 9, 2011.
I do and I answered no because in 3 words, "I am a rebel".
I will debate, only on condition that the inevitable loser does not cry home to mommy.
I'm definitely up for a 1-on-1 debate, so I hope I'm not too late (this is the 1st time I've checked this subject category). But I am unclear on one central aspect of the, " debate, " mechanics. As I read it described, the participants would be offered a subject-- but get to choose whether they're pro or con?-- and then get 5 days to prepare their arguments. Does that mean that both arguments would come out simultaneously, & IN FULL (because that's really an editorial-piece competition, not a debate; which in no way lessens my interest)? Alternately, did you mean that, for 5 days, the thread would be open to just the two participants, during which time they'd debate (in which case, also, I'm in)? However, I can conceive of a 3rd option that would cause me to switch from wanting to participate to volunteering to judge (provided I'm deemed to meet the degree of seniority requisite for that role): if day 5 marked only the debate's start, with each debater posting just an opening statement, followed by a live, timed forensic duel, my laboriously slow phone-typing speed would be too great a disability.
Thank you immensely for replying to this topic.
I am up for a debate on just about any subject you can think of and I am even willing to take on far more than merely one rival in that debate!
Some of the topics of most interest to me are:
1. Theistic Evolutionary Theory vs ATheistic Evolutionary Theory, google CarbonBias.blogspot.ca/ to get some hints as to where I am at on this topic.
2. A Carbon Tax vs the alternative theory on stabilization of the climate through deliberately turning deserts green.
3. MMT, Modern Monetary Theory and how it could be used to induce a SURGE in real estate values in rural America and prevent the present economic aspect of this COVID 19 crisis from leading to another 1929 like event.
I can think of others if nobody is willing to challenge me on these topics.
(Would it be ethical or appropriate for me to give you links to discussions that I already have going on these topics or other ones that would tend to fit in nicely in this category)?
I can't think of anything unethical about providing links to discussions; after all, that's what brought me here. In fact, I'm very interested to know how you think deserts could be terra-formed. I actually have my own idea on countering global warming which, at least at 1st glance, seems a lot easier than the concept you're proposing (no offense). I actually passed it along to NOAA, by speaking to the person in charge of investigating things like this (but it's been a couple of years & I have a feeling it's been forgotten). Also I'm curious, at least, about your monetary theory plan-- who shouldn't be?
So fire away w/ those links. But, so I haven't given you the wrong idea, know that, while I'm not shy about speaking my mind, I'm not esp. looking to challenge others' ideas merely for the sake of arguing (I tell myself that, anyway). To my mind, the most successful debate would function more like a discussion in which open-minded participants, when presented w/ legitimately- sound ideas, could acknowledge their merit w/o feeling like a, " loser, " with the potential of actually moving towards one another's view (& the best discussion is one in which there's no need to stifle or soften one's ideas for fear of stepping on the toes of the other adults involved).
I live in Central - Nova, N. S., Canada and Mr. Peter MacKay served as our Member of Parliament for many years.
I admit that I could be overly optimistic but I heard him speak in two federal level debates and I consider that if Canadians have the intelligence to elect this man as our Prime Minister he could well positively impact the way that Ottawa and Canada do business with the USA and the rest of the world.
I believe that Mr. Peter MacKay is in a unique position to convince millions of people that the Al Gore theory of a Carbon Tax will NOT be an effective short term solution to the threat of rising ocean levels as methane is released from the permafrost in the Arctic.
I will try to find you a copy of the message that I posted to one of his groups but here is the gist of it.
Low lying real estate all over the world over these past several decades was saved from being submerged significantly to the amount of H2O being ADDED to Antarctica.
How much longer will central Antarctica save our coastal communities?
Because Mr. Peter MacKay saw the BAy of Fundy tides go in and out so many times as he traveled around Nova Scotia and New Brunswick he is uniquely prepared to comprehend the implications of the mathematics and geography of the Bay of Fundy here in Canada.
We may have the first debate topic
We do not need approval to do this and I have done so quite successfully elsewhere using this simple format.
1) debate is agreed upon by two members in PM.
2) a thread is started indicating topic and that it is a "TRUE DEBATE".
3) all discussion from outside membership is instantly ignored by participants.
4) each member is allowed a total of ten(10) posts before debate is ended.
5) participants choose a judge through PM and that judge ends the debate by declaring a winner.
This system works very well when mature people follow these rules.
Do you have any suggestions for potential topics?
I have many as should most people, Trumpism come to mind right now.
What about Trumpism?
How it effects our population and political system. This would best be between a Trumpist and a Non.
I'm a Non, & I'm guessing you are, as well.
You are correct.
Just as well; it seems that most threads, lately, eventually end up being about Trump & Trumpism. I'd prefer a fresher path to tread.
Separate names with a comma.