Daystar

[Purple Rabbit]

The problem I have is I have to keep asking the same questions over and over again without any answer. And he just doesn't understand the burden of proof after me repeatedly telling him. How can I debate with him if he never addresses my questions? He repeatedly misunderstands the burden of proof.
Repeatedly having to ask the same things over and over. And never getting an answer. All this is not really debating.
The thing is: I am perfectly happy to debate with him if he'll either admit that he has "faith" and no evidence. Or he'll actually provide evidence.
If he doesn't have evidence. Then he should stop pretending he does and totally disrupting the debate!
If he just says its "faith" then fine. Its not based on evidence. We can talk about something else
It causes nothing but trouble if he won't give evidence and keeps pretending that he has it when he doesn't. And then attacking us atheists like the burden of proof is on us. When it obviously isn't.
I ask, Daystar, do you actually know what the burden of proof is? Or are you just ignorant or refuse to admit you have no evidence on the matter and only have "faith".

I have debated on many fora (or is it forums in good english?) and I think you should never underestimate the number of silent readers. Although you may at times times feel desperate in trying to get the debate beyond the rain dance phase, many silent readers get the point. Convincing your opponent seldom is a sign of victory and not convincing your opponent seldom a defeat.