(April 19, 2009 at 2:59 am)fr0d0 Wrote: That quote was mine and not dagda's Kyu. Dagda said debate, and you said you had no time. Life overtook you but for a very short time, not enough to prevent you from debating. The question still stands.
No it doesn't, I was replying to Dagda not you and I have explained .. it's done, deal with it.
(April 19, 2009 at 2:59 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I showed you why your 'resource bank' would be a problem Kyu. You seem to want to ignore the unfair playing field.
It is patently unfair to ask that I do not use MY OWN resources, that I am prepared and you are supposedly not is not my problem and if you feel it is that unfair that I invite you to decline the debate.
(April 19, 2009 at 2:59 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I have another thought. With the title of the debate (god(s), science & evidence), I'm going to have to argue the opposite of course, so you could rightly accuse me of straying from the debate topic. My response would be based around: God (singular), why science is only appropriate in the discussion theoretically, that it has no real relevance to the subject, (and the lack of evidence). If you have a problem with that then we need to sort this out beforehand I'd suggest.
The rules are up (subject to change before acceptance) and there will, I assume, be a referee so if either of us think the other is being unfair then that is the person to whom that point should be made ... I am happy enough to let you choose the person to referee and I will only have a veto, fair enough?
Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
