Wylted has reached the peak of debating

"You are not evolved enough, Wylted, you let yourself stagnate. You actually have probably been the single most declining debater of the DDO-to-DART's history, I've never seen someone go from as good as you used to be to as dogshit as you are now.
I pity you, I worry for you. I don't type this to hurt you, I type this to talk down to you as you talk down to me except what I am saying is really true. Try harder, put more heart into this shit. Be the Wylted who shows up to a debate and makes me shake in my fucking chair, don't be the Wylted who I laugh at as he barely can form a coherent argument and forfeits."

1. Wylted is too good.
   

The return to primitive through revolutionary aspects are the only solution to industrialization. I can’t go into detail about how to achieve this because of site rules, but great changes can be made from revolutionary forces of a small segment of society. Returning to the primitive state of humanity would fix the above listed problems and give us all better lives, as well as better lives for animals and the Earth and future generations.

• If an average joe starts working out to become a professional power-lifter, it will take years for them to advance to this stage.
  
• If a powerlifter gets lazy and their inactivity shrinks their muscles that they digress back to average joe, it will only take a few weeks to a few months of lifting to re-attain their former strength.
  

• Wylted has gotten lazier and more complacent, not worse.
  
• Wylted is trying to make everyone underestimate him, so that he can destroy everyone when they're off-guard and not expecting him to return or make a comeback. In other words, this is the most elaborate and subtle trolling scheme yet.
  

The longer you spend away from the topic the more you forget. Since topics seem to repeat I have in actuality lost the knowledge I need to debate better than I could in the past. 

I prefer novel topics and I use novel arguments which is one of the reasons why it was tough to beat me . Weird arguments catch people off guard.

So what does this have to do with memory. 

At that time I I did have more time on my hands and I had a lot less direction in life so I would just dive into whatever conspiracy theory caught my eye. I would seek out weird arguments so at any one time I could be studying how Hitler was fake and Kermit Roosevelt was actually an actor playing the part of Him, while also studying nuclear weapons being fake.

I was taking all these weird positions and deep diving into them. These surprise arguments aren't doable to the nature of the internet now as well as constraints on my time.I don't possess that advantage now where I can look at 100 different things keep them all in mind at once and debate them succinctly.

 we also have longer term memory. Like I said I was I was studying a lot of subjects then now a lot of my time spent is working or or studying non debate things. there's no time to study  other than some of the philosophical text I've been reading lately.

Long-term memory is an issue like a lot of people know that it's far as seeing a doctor is concerned if you have like some sort of rare disease you know if you get yourself some 60-year-old experienced doctor sure if you have like a common disease they'll treat you better you're more likely to survive I assume with a heart attack. But every time I hear one of these cases where somebody had a rare disease and they couldn't figure out what the hell it was and it finally gets discovered. it's discovered because they just happened to visit a young doctor fresh out of medical school. The reason being is cuz even though their practical knowledge is probably lower than an experienced doctor their theoretical knowledge is significantly better. 

That might seem Petty or not a big deal that my pool game would get worse. But this is important to me for whatever reason. I do think that in granted I've thought this a lot of times and it came back to bite me an ass but I think I've figured out some coping mechanisms where I'm less likely to become hypomanic. The election may have pushed me close to it because once you know I start losing sleep or fighting hard for something I do increase my chances of getting into one he's three months episodes I noticed or sometimes if I start pushing hard at work like I decided to do 100 hour weeks then my body at first will get be really tired and then I would just push me into a hypomanic episode and then boom I'm good for three or four months working 100 hour weeks.

Now as I say I feel like I've it conquered it to a large extent because I've noticed what types of thought patterns can bring on an episode. It's possible those are merely thought patterns that precede another episode and not bring them on but I think in large part they they help bring on the hypomanic episodes and if you can avoid the hypomanic episodes generally you can also avoid the depressed episodes that follow. I guess I don't have any proof I haven't heard read the research on it but I believe that cutting back a lot on carbs can reduce my chances of becoming hypomantic so I've got back on carbs a lot. This of course means that I am less likely that some hypomanic and have the advantages associated with hypomania

I am also currently not hypomanic so there's an argument for the fact that I cannot be at my peak ability at the moment

Rebuttals

Wylted is too good

Probings of a debate for my past that's part of the past where we can say hey maybe I was at my peak done but I'm not now. Ultimately what what I did though was I kind of took some shortcuts that debate as I'm rereading it that I see.

For example any of you that when I click on the debate he's referencing and take an actual look at it you'll see it kind of what I did. I noticed that some people that went a lot of debates what they'll do is they'll just almost kind of plagiarize and get away with it and they can I guess legally get away with it because you're just commenting on another person's work but it's still not really your own thoughts.

So what did I do I took arguments made by Theodore kaczynski against the point my opponent was trying to make and I pretty much copy paste them all the way down the debate while adding enough commentary to make the arguments fit the debate as well as to make enough commentary to not get accused of plagiarism. However if you can take a look at it I guess I could do debates like that right now but that that wouldn't make me in my prime because it's it's easier to run over that sort of thing then it is for somebody that actually have a well thought out philosophy of their own.

Now why did the debate looks so good. I'll tell you why it's because I a copy and pasted theater krasinski's words Theodore krasinski of course is a genius there is probably one out every 10,000 people that smart and that might be even more rare than that to see that kind of genius I believe Theodore Kentucky is probably like a good 10 IQ points higher than me the more importantly it's not a good testament to any sort of skill in that debate because I copy and paste it and added commentary. I suggest maybe if you're bad at debate and you want to do a higher level debate like that you could do a similar thing take if you want to argue some sort of mealism take a book by niche and then just copy and paste this s***.

Rebuttal 2 Wylted has plateaud.

I largely agree with a lot of what pro says here. However it doesn't really support his case because we're arguing about whether I've peaked. Basically whether I'm at the top of my game right now and pro brings up some things that prove that I'm not you mentioned being Rusty well that would make me not top my game and he can say that I can knock off the rush relatively quickly but that doesn't negate the fact that I am Rusty currently and we are debating my current level.