Suicidal Thoughts, Generally Low Self-Esteem and Atheism

Author: RationalMadman
psychology
Philosophy
mental health
Depression
Atheism

Posts

Total: 88
#61
Juice
Juice's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 63
0
0
5
Juice's avatar
Juice
0
0
5
To all, here is a saying I like to keep in mind. 

If you burn every scientific textbook, it will come back in some sort of shape or form in the next 1000 years. This is because the scientific textbook is a collection of observable facts. However, if you burn every single bible in the world, it will never come back. You would think that the big book of life which has human morality etched in it's pages would be a bit durable than this. 

Think about it. Where do science textbooks come from? Nature. Where does the bible come from? Obviously, since it will never come back if burnt, it is not in observable nature. It comes from imagination. 


This example was first made by Ricky Gervais. 
#62
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,436
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Juice
To all, here is a saying I like to keep in mind. 

If you burn every scientific textbook, it will come back in some sort of shape or form in the next 1000 years. This is because the scientific textbook is a collection of observable facts. However, if you burn every single bible in the world, it will never come back. You would think that the big book of life which has human morality etched in it's pages would be a bit durable than this. 

Think about it. Where do science textbooks come from? Nature. Where does the bible come from? Obviously, since it will never come back if burnt, it is not in observable nature. It comes from imagination. 


This example was first made by Ricky Gervais. 
If every bible was burnt - it still would not get rid if the Bible.  There are many people all around the world, who have memorised it. Totally.  

As for science, perhaps some of it would be observed. But other stuff, like the origin of the universe, or indeed evolution would soon be discarded because it is not observable. 

One other interesting thing is that there have been people who try the bible and destroy it. The Nazis and the Communists most notable.  And if you look back into ancient Israel, many of their own tried to destroy it. But somehow for whatever reason GOD keeps preserving his Word.  Now you would not only have to burn every book - you would have to destroy the internte and every computer and phone. 

The one thing poor old Ricky keeps forgetting is that God is real and he will maintain his word indeed as he has over 4000 years.  That is an observable fact. I wonder what you will do that? 
#63
RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@Mopac
Good point.

Just think, the closest thing to an "invisible" floating skyman isn't even invisible.

#64
Juice
Juice's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 63
0
0
5
Juice's avatar
Juice
0
0
5
If every bible was burnt - it still would not get rid if the Bible.  There are many people all around the world, who have memorised it. Totally.  
That's not what I meant. The point is that the Bible is not observable from nature, and that it came from some peasants imagination. Things like gravity, chemistry and physics are all a product of observations and calculations. 

As for science, perhaps some of it would be observed. But other stuff, like the origin of the universe, or indeed evolution would soon be discarded because it is not observable. 
I can almost hear the reluctance in you admitting some of science can be observed. You state that evolution cannot be observed? This is embarrassing. Then how did Darwin come up with his theory? Was it his imagination? Did he make it up? No, he observed it in nature. Leading scientists such as Richard Dawkins have run computer programs which simulate this exactly. 

Why is that it is the most recognised biological discovery of the century? Biologists and evolutionists have found that Darwin is right. Every living object are in fact related. 

One other interesting thing is that there have been people who try the bible and destroy it. The Nazis and the Communists most notable.  And if you look back into ancient Israel, many of their own tried to destroy it. But somehow for whatever reason GOD keeps preserving his Word. 
Oh yes, of course. It's God. God is so keen to keep his word he's willing to intervene. Is there any evidence of this? No. But no matters, I'll play along. 

Assuming God kept the bible in circulation, that would mean he has been active in the last 50 years. It would also mean he is willing to intervene with human activity. You mentioned the Nazi? Good on you. Why is that God didn't do a thing when Jews were being tortured, raped and gassed? Why is is that God allowed WW2 to begin? Why does God send tsunamis which kill millions? You've stubbed your own toe here buddy. You've closed your own escape hatch. The usual response would have been "God doesn't want to intervene with humans" but as you have stated, he is willing to save his own book and goes as far as intervening with humans. Is God so greedy that he is willing to save his book, and not act when Jews by the millions are dying. 

Now you would not only have to burn every book - you would have to destroy the internt and every computer and phone. 
You clearly do not understand. It's quite embarrassing. The point isn't to say whether this is possible, because it's not. I'm saying hypothetically, if the bible was wiped from human memory, it would be gone forever. I then compare this to science, where if every scientific fact is erased, it would be back in some shape or form. 


The one thing poor old Ricky keeps forgetting is that God is real and he will maintain his word indeed as he has over 4000 years.  That is an observable fact. I wonder what you will do that? 
I feel pity for your ignorance. You really are, to put it plainly, stupid. "God is real". Haha. What part of God is an observable fact? The part where he lets Jews die? The part where he puts Asians in internment camps? The part where he allows children to be raped? Where is the evidence.  Trust me, if you gave me any sort of testable evidence, I will examine it, but the only thing you religious chaps can say is "have faith". 

Embarrassing. 




#65
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,346
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
The point is that the Bible is not observable from nature
Personally I think that the Bible 'can be observed through game theory and history.

peasants imagination
Seems a bit of a high horse statement, and incorrect. To my thinking anyhow.
#66
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
So the biblical hypothesis/mythology has developed over the last 4000 years...Yep, that's a reasonably statement....But all very current in terms of humankind and data transfer.

And burning a book keeps you warm for a few moments...So what.

And data is out there whether it be theistic or atheistic and none of it is going anywhere anytime soon.

And the floaty sky man data was once the basis of Christianity, but has long since been open to modification...Which is only to be expected.

What is unchanged though, is the Christians (or any other theists) inability to unequivocally prove their own particular creation hypothesis.

#67
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Juice
The Ultimate Reality is God.

The fact that there is some form of existence acts as evidence of God, because if there is reality as it appears to be, there must be reality as it truly is. 


#68
Juice
Juice's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 63
0
0
5
Juice's avatar
Juice
0
0
5
-->
@Mopac
The Ultimate Reality is God.
That's your view. No evidence provided. 

The fact that there is some form of existence acts as evidence of God,
That's your belief, no evidence provided. Why does it have to be God who created the world? Why cant be be some other God? Why can't it be thor? What makes your god different to the others. 



#69
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Juice
If you don't accept The Ultimate Reality as being God, then I don't believe in whatever god you are talking about either, so we can't be talking about the same thing.

We have believed since the very start that The Truth is God.

What evidence would you even accept? 

#70
Juice
Juice's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 63
0
0
5
Juice's avatar
Juice
0
0
5
-->
@Mopac
Answer these 

Why do you ignore geological evidence which confirms the world is older than 10 000 years old?

Why do you ignore astromnemers who have observed light from distant starts, confirming the universe is billions of years old?

Why do you ignore Steven Hawkings' discovery (testable) that something did come from nothing?

Why do you ignore Richard Dawkins testable findings that the case for God is weak? 

Why do you love a God who is inactive when Jews are being gassed?

Why do you love a God who created bugs which bit into children's eyes, causing them to go blind?

Why do you love a God who doesn't care that children are being raped?

Why do natural disasters occur, killing millions annually?

#71
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Juice
I'll answer your questions after you answer mine.

Where do you get the idea that you have an understanding of my faith or what I believe?
#72
Juice
Juice's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 63
0
0
5
Juice's avatar
Juice
0
0
5
-->
@Mopac
Because I go to an Anglican school and have leant about this. 

Now answer my questions instead of avoiding them. 


#73
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Juice
If I was truly avoiding your questions, I wouldn't make the requirement for me answering them so easy.

The Anglican church is heretical. They aren't orthodox. I have family in England. Apparently, the Anglican church calls it blasphemy against The Holy Spirit to say sodomy is wrong. They let Muslims pray and teach the Quoran in their churches.

How did the Anglican Church get its start? All the reformers who broke away from Roman Catholicism had theological reasons for breaking away. The Anglican Church broke away because the king didn't want to be told how to conduct his married life.

Why do you ignore geological evidence which confirms the world is older than 10 000 years old?

I don't know what you are talking about.

Why do you ignore astromnemers who have observed light from distant starts, confirming the universe is billions of years old?

I don't know what you are talking about.


Why do you ignore Steven Hawkings' discovery (testable) that something did come from nothing?

Steven Hawkings thinks the fact that we don't know the mind of God is proof that God doesn't exist. His viewpoint on this matter is idiotic.

That said, we do actually believe that God created the universe out of nothing.


Why do you ignore Richard Dawkins testable findings that the case for God is weak?

Richard Dawkins has a superstitious understanding of God. Besides that, he is a pseudoscientist who doesn't actually perform any science. He's actually kind of an idiot.

If I was an atheist, I would be embarassed to have him as my represenative, and truly, when I went through my atheist phase, I found Richard Dawkins to be an embarassment.

Why do you love a God who is inactive when Jews are being gassed?
The God I believe in is The Ultimate Reality. That being the case, making peace with reality is an integral part of my religious practice. Hating reality because it doesn't conform to how I think reality should be is not only against my religion, but it is patently maladaptive.


Why do you love a God who created bugs which bit into children's eyes, causing them to go blind?
The God I believe in is The Ultimate Reality. That being the case, making peace with reality is an integral part of my religious practice. Hating reality because it doesn't conform to how I think reality should be is not only against my religion, but it is patently maladaptive.

Why do you love a God who doesn't care that children are being raped?
You say God doesn't care. I don't believe that to be the case.


Why do natural disasters occur, killing millions annually?
I'm sure there are a lot of reasons. Many of which that are beyond my knowing.
#74
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,436
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Juice
If every bible was burnt - it still would not get rid if the Bible.  There are many people all around the world, who have memorised it. Totally.  
That's not what I meant. The point is that the Bible is not observable from nature, and that it came from some peasants imagination. Things like gravity, chemistry and physics are all a product of observations and calculations. 
I knew what you meant. I disagree with you. 


As for science, perhaps some of it would be observed. But other stuff, like the origin of the universe, or indeed evolution would soon be discarded because it is not observable. 
I can almost hear the reluctance in you admitting some of science can be observed. You state that evolution cannot be observed? This is embarrassing. Then how did Darwin come up with his theory? Was it his imagination? Did he make it up? No, he observed it in nature. Leading scientists such as Richard Dawkins have run computer programs which simulate this exactly. 
Well sorry tootems. It is not observable for everyone - so it is not observable.  I can get a 1000 people who can provide observations of the reality of God in their lives. But you would say - you can't prove it to me.  But I have yet to see anyone produce any observable evidence of evolution.  And if it is not observable to millions of people it is not observable. It has to be observable to all be to true - that is what every atheist says - I have seen no evidence for God therefore it is not true.  I have not seen any evidence for evolution. EVER.  Every time some evolution puts up some evidence an alternative reasonable explanation can be provided.  This is why the doctrine remains controversial. It has not been proved to be true for everyone. 

Why is that it is the most recognised biological discovery of the century? Biologists and evolutionists have found that Darwin is right. Every living object are in fact related. 
Well actually, Darwin has been shown to be wrong on many occasions by so called evolutionists.  His work keeps getting rewritten.  But when his priests and disciples are the ones who call him right - well - what do you do? You are not allowed to criticize the pope or Darwin. 


One other interesting thing is that there have been people who try the bible and destroy it. The Nazis and the Communists most notable.  And if you look back into ancient Israel, many of their own tried to destroy it. But somehow for whatever reason GOD keeps preserving his Word. 
Oh yes, of course. It's God. God is so keen to keep his word he's willing to intervene. Is there any evidence of this? No. But no matters, I'll play along. 

Assuming God kept the bible in circulation, that would mean he has been active in the last 50 years. It would also mean he is willing to intervene with human activity. You mentioned the Nazi? Good on you. Why is that God didn't do a thing when Jews were being tortured, raped and gassed? Why is is that God allowed WW2 to begin? Why does God send tsunamis which kill millions? You've stubbed your own toe here buddy. You've closed your own escape hatch. The usual response would have been "God doesn't want to intervene with humans" but as you have stated, he is willing to save his own book and goes as far as intervening with humans. Is God so greedy that he is willing to save his book, and not act when Jews by the millions are dying. 
Red Herring.  Of course we know you were talking hypothetically - but it is people such as the Nazis and the Communists who want to burn books. That is the point isn't? You hate free speech. You hate that people want to think for themselves and not be brainwashed by the socialist agenda.  I suggest that EVIL proves God exists.  Evil requires an absolute standard. Take away the standard and there is no evil. Evil then becomes a relativistic liquid thing that is dependent only on the current generation and will inevitably change with the next. I think God intervenes when he chooses. But it is entirely his prerogative and entirely moral in either event. God is the author of life - hence it is impossible for to murder anyone. Only people who are not the author of life can murder.  What he gives he can take away. This is his prerogative. 


Now you would not only have to burn every book - you would have to destroy the internt and every computer and phone. 
You clearly do not understand. It's quite embarrassing. The point isn't to say whether this is possible, because it's not. I'm saying hypothetically, if the bible was wiped from human memory, it would be gone forever. I then compare this to science, where if every scientific fact is erased, it would be back in some shape or form. 
Duh!  Yes, speculative hypothetical nonsense - all I have done is demonstrate the nonsense of the argument. Science would not arise again without the Christian worldview. The current trajectory of philosophy is towards relativism and fluidity. It is opposed to absolutes and rules.  Science will not survive for long without its foundations of truth and absolutes. It requires things to remain in solids not in fluids.  And once the world becomes more and more consistent with this philosophy, then science will altogether become the pseudo science it is starting to reflect even now. 

The one thing poor old Ricky keeps forgetting is that God is real and he will maintain his word indeed as he has over 4000 years.  That is an observable fact. I wonder what you will do that? 
I feel pity for your ignorance. You really are, to put it plainly, stupid. "God is real". Haha. What part of God is an observable fact? The part where he lets Jews die? The part where he puts Asians in internment camps? The part where he allows children to be raped? Where is the evidence.  Trust me, if you gave me any sort of testable evidence, I will examine it, but the only thing you religious chaps can say is "have faith". 
You seem to think that these things are evil? Would you care to explain what evil is? And whether evil is real or just a fluid part of our generations moral consciousness - here today but gone tomorrow? It would be interesting to see where you draw a line or if you even believe in a line? 


#75
Juice
Juice's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 63
0
0
5
Juice's avatar
Juice
0
0
5
-->
@Mopac
@Tradesecret
Sorry for my late reply. I have been very busy. 

As the two of you are religious and seem very convicted of it, I will be willing to debate one of you on this matter, as this back and forth can quite literally go on forever. It will have to be at a later date as I am currently participating in a 5 round debate. 

To quickly address your two points 

Mopap: You have essentially done nothing besides express your disagreement and ignore my points. You have provided no evidence nor any rebuttals. 

Tradesecret: You too, have provided no evidence. The only thing you have done is discredit Darwin. Then you turn to morality. The issue with this is that God doesn't solve the morality issue, it simply postpones it. Is murder bad because it is, or is it bad because God says it is? Another issue I see is that you instantly default to God when you do not understand something. I could very easily make a hypothetical god which answers all out current day dilemmas.  Though you may believe your God solves the issue of morality, and even if it hypothetically does, you still have the issue of proving God's existence. 
#76
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Juice
There is nothing to debate.

Either you sre talking about the same God I am or you aren't.

The God I believe is The Ultimate Reality.

You have no argument against my God.

#77
Juice
Juice's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 63
0
0
5
Juice's avatar
Juice
0
0
5
-->
@Mopac
Do you believe in the God from the new and old testament 
#78
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Juice
I certainly believe in a Godnthat you do not know. A God you think you know. So when I say I believe in the God of the bible, you would have in your mind an image of that God that does not resemble the God I believe.

The God I believe is The Ultimate Reality. The Truth is God.

To say that my God does not exist is a confession of nihilism, that is, the rejection of Absolute Truth and Ultimate Reality. 
#79
Juice
Juice's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 63
0
0
5
Juice's avatar
Juice
0
0
5
-->
@Mopac
yes or no it's easy. Do you abide by the ten commandments? Do you believe in the resurrection of Jesus. 
#80
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Juice
I certainly do my best to "abide by the 10 commandments". Is this not a good guideline for moral living? What is objectionable about them?

Do I believe in the ressurection of Jesus? As surely as I believe that when men in their evil make war against The Truth, and do what they can to exterminate it, The Truth cannot truly be killed. It will rise again. 
#81
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Juice
It is a simple yes to both questions.

All I am doing is pointing out that even if we use the same words, we do not understand these things the same way. Therefore, whatever answer I give is not the answer that you will hear.
#82
Juice
Juice's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 63
0
0
5
Juice's avatar
Juice
0
0
5
-->
@Mopac
So you believe a man who was born from a virgin mother, stabbed to death, buried, came back to life to meet his father who is also himself? Yes or no. 
#83
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Juice
That is an easy no. No Christian believes this.

#84
Juice
Juice's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 63
0
0
5
Juice's avatar
Juice
0
0
5
-->
@Mopac
Christians believe Jesus was born from a virgin mother. 

Christians believe he stabbed to death on a cross. 

Christians believe he came back to life

Christians believe he then met God, his father. 

Christians believe that God is represented in the holy trinity, so Jesus is God. 

So I'm not sure what Christians you are talking about. 
#85
SirAnonymous
SirAnonymous's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,140
3
7
10
SirAnonymous's avatar
SirAnonymous
3
7
10
-->
@Juice
Actually Mopac is right.
Christians believe he stabbed to death on a cross. 
No. Jesus was already dead when He was stabbed. That is why water flowed out of the wound. That only happens in cases when the person is already dead.
Christians believe that God is represented in the holy trinity, so Jesus is God.
Yes, but God the Father and God the Son are not the same person according to Christian doctrine. The Trinity is one God in three persons, so it is incorrect according to Christian doctrine that the Father and the Son are the same person.
#86
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Juice
Well, for one, nobody says Jesus was stabbed to death.

But I will present to you our creed

"I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not created, of one essence with the Father through Whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man. He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried; And He rose on the third day, according to the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father; And He will come again with glory to judge the living and dead. His kingdom shall have no end.

And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke through the prophets.

In one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come.

Amen."

#87
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,436
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Juice

Tradesecret: You too, have provided no evidence. The only thing you have done is discredit Darwin. Then you turn to morality. The issue with this is that God doesn't solve the morality issue, it simply postpones it. Is murder bad because it is, or is it bad because God says it is? Another issue I see is that you instantly default to God when you do not understand something. I could very easily make a hypothetical god which answers all out current day dilemmas.  Though you may believe your God solves the issue of morality, and even if it hypothetically does, you still have the issue of proving God's existence. 
The problem with murder directly has to do with God. Humanity is made in the image of God. When someone strikes humanity it is essentially striking at God. And whether this is murder, or even assault or indeed rape, it is the same thing. 

Murder is evil because it strikes at the creator of the universe, the author of life.   Now that is a significant justification. And before you laugh at that thought as some would, it is also very alike in nature for the justification we have in our legal systems today for any crime committed. In the Western legal system you will probably note we have the criminal justice system and the civil justice system.  The former is for offences against the state. the latter for offences against the individual or private person. Yet when someone is murdered - or assaulted it is the police who deal with it - not the individual or private person. Why? Because the real victim in that sense is not the private citizen but the State. And so the STATE brings the action in the Criminal Justice System and provides the appropriate justice it believes will satisfy itself.  Why do the private citizens feel outraged when the sentence is so weak from their point of view? Because they think that they, the private citizen is the victim - but they are incorrect. The crime of murder or assault is a crime against the STATE and the STATE is the primary VICTIM.  If others feel unsatisfied by this - then they can go to the civil courts and bring their own action - indeed as they did in the OJ SImpson trial. 

To say that murder is wrong because its strikes at God through his image of humanity is a signficant justification.  Yet for humanity - in a world where there is no God and humanity is taught that survival of the fittest is natural, then the reason for prosecuting murder changes significantly.  It probably comes down to social contract - we want to know that we want to live without fear of being killed - so we promise or contract in society not to kill people - unless there is a lawful ??? reason to do so.  Hence it becomes pragmatic to not kill people.  Unfortunately, this does not really produce a law except out of fear.  Imagine that - trying to get people to agree to do something out of fear? LOLL! 

It really leads to "you can do anything you want - just don't get caught."

Also I reject your allegation that I resort to some sort of God of the gaps strawman.   I resort to God when I know things and when I don't know things. Given God is the ultimate reality in our existence it would be difficult not to do so.  And it would also sort of demonstrate that my view was false if I did not do so.  I do not take the view that God somehow answers all of our unknowns.   Not knowing something now does not mean we wont in the future. 

It is impractical and impossible to know everything.  Scientists don't just sit there and think to themselves "gee I can't find that answer - lets throw science away.". If they can find a solution themselves they will look for it. If they think someone else can find it - they will defer to their abilities. If they just know that we don't have the capacity to know right now and probably wont for decades - they will just put it to the back of their mind and go on with their work. This is the same for believers. We don't have to all of the answers now - and that is ok. We can leave things in God's hands - that too is ok. 

I love it when people who don't believe in God think it is up to people who do - to prove it.  The burden of proof is not on us.  It is on you. 

God is the default. Atheism is still the minority by a long way.  Everything we see is evidence for God. And yet, you cannot see any of it. I cannot explain that. 

#88
Juice
Juice's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 63
0
0
5
Juice's avatar
Juice
0
0
5
-->
@Tradesecret
Would you like to challenge me in a debate regarding this topic in the near future? I wish to properly debate and dissect your points. This back and forth can go on forever. 

On a quick note, the section where you say the BoP is on me is just simply ridiculous. You are the one proposing this idea, and yet you have literally just shyed away from giving any evidence. Embarrassing. I look forwards to debating and beating you in the near future.