Some Simple Questions show Atheistic Origin Science is false (proof 2 begins)

[Jackalope]

I can already tell you, as a member of staff, that no official debate will occur here under those terms.

They are completely unreasonable, and if you can't see that, that's your problem.

I kind of had a feeling this might be the case. Sorry Gracie, but you either gotta play fair, or not play at all.

I'm sure you understand - while the above is my opinion only, I don't think that the rest of the staff is going to be willing to make a mockery of a formal debate - where higher standards of intellectual rigor apply.

[Kayenneh]

I bet that if such a debate were allowed with Gracie controlling all the rules, she'd still lose.

Yeah, the win gene did pass over this one.. When you Grace talked about unbeneficial mutations, I have to agree that you made a point (that you perhaps did not want to make). Please tell me that you are either sterile, not going to have children or pass away before multiplying. That would be the kindest favor you could give mankind

I'm sure you understand - while the above is my opinion only, I don't think that the rest of the staff is going to be willing to make a mockery of a formal debate - where higher standards of intellectual rigor apply.

I can second that.

[Ryantology]

I have absolute say over all rules. I will let you know what they are as we discuss things.
All my pronouncements are final or I win.

Are you sure?

How about this: You get absolute say over all rules, but I will be the judge of the debate, able to decide the winner according to criteria I have total control over and can alter at any time, for any reason.

That sounds fair, doesn't it? What do you say, Esq?

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I bet that if such a debate were allowed with Gracie controlling all the rules, she'd still lose.

She has a 100% loosing streak in tic tac toe, I hear.

[pocaracas]

I'm sure you understand - while the above is my opinion only, I don't think that the rest of the staff is going to be willing to make a mockery of a formal debate - where higher standards of intellectual rigor apply.

I can second that.

I can third it!

BTW, Why do we still indulge this person?
It's about time we ignored it/he/she....

[Cyberman]

I'm sure you understand - while the above is my opinion only, I don't think that the rest of the staff is going to be willing to make a mockery of a formal debate - where higher standards of intellectual rigor apply.

I can second that.

Goes for me too. Why even bother having any rules at all, if it boils down to one person demanding all the high ground and pre-emptively declaring victory? Grace under fire is not a pretty impressive specimen. Were I among the God Squad, I would probably leave out of sheer embarrassment round about this point.

[Minimalist]

Yes or no

How about Go Fuck Yourself?

[Heir Apparent]

Awwwwww sheeit this is getting good. Although I must admit even an official debate will be a pointless time waster since we know what kind of fallacious rhetoric Grace comes up with, I'd still like to see it.

I'll make signs and

[Cyberman]

I'll just leave this here:

[Brakeman]

Well, to be fair, when one is arguing the reality of one's imaginary friend, who was sometimes described in third person during solitary times by someone who was not present and copied by unknown copyists, then you need a pretty big handicap. I strongly worry if making up all the rules, definitions and facts is enough of a handicap for grace???