It's just unfortunate to me I suppose. Regardless this guy isn't a good debater in my opinion. Records are misleading and frankly, anyone can win a debate with an equitable resolution. Some of the people ascribed with this perception are simply just bad faith individuals who hardly ever have genuine challenges.
Well, i'm not blaming you or anything, I do understand people have things to do and that's fine, I am just frustrated with the results here because I think it's obvious that I am the rightful winner here.
Well, what can I say? Everyone knows I won this debate. I was robbed by some far left ideologue who clearly made a ridiculous RFD and did not understand the arguments made. The issue with this site isn't debates, it's the voters.
Here is a quote from someone who voted bombed for oromagi previously saying he still would have voted for him even if it was obvious he was losing.
> "I would have voted for oromagi if it looked like he was losing." (FLRW).
Do you think it's not a genuine issue to have someone openly admit he would vote against an individual even if he thought they won, for apparently no reason at all?
Do you know how annoying and it is to have challenged the" top ranked" debater on the platform, clearly and evidently defeated him argumentatively, and still "loose" the debate on record?
Don't know exactly what you are mentioning me for...but given your willingness to extend your argument in respect to the debates conclusion, it appears self evident that this comment holds far from any imperative to you.
It's very funny from a personal standpoint. I would score the debate a draw by virtue of its entertainment. I also don't know how you manage to respond so quickly.
Mall may have won this debate. As this is my new account I do not yet have voting permissions, but I can evaluate that Rational Madman's output was much too low here.
Would it not be better to make use of the quote feature in order to make the rebuttals more clear? It's hard for both readers and voters this way in my opinion.
Okay, so, if one is aware of the feeling of having read something so foolish/idiotic, but is meant to be serious, that is close to my current line of thoughts in respect to the comments section of this debate.
"Laurence Krauss has also tried to explain that a universe comes from nothing if there are pre existent quantum fluctuations. However these quantum fluctuations can only happen where there is time and space. And before the universe there was no time and space. Second of all pre existent timeless and spaceless quantum fluctuations are not a true nothing(a true nothing doesn't even have and are very similar to the necessary substance."
Look, I am a really humble person and I don't have much of an ego.
I honestly think you had a lot on your plate, and you didn't have time for this debate. That's 100% fine because we all have lives.
This is quite literally an extension of respect to your name because I know (and hopefully we can agree) that you should have won this debate.
Thanks, it was indeed an interesting engagement
You must be extremely occupied to allow a duration of two weeks for posting arguments
I don't know if that is what he means, but this should not be a hard debate based on this. The resolution is not a debate that exists.
The instigator clearly forfeited, can someone vote on this please?
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3403-atheism-is-simply-a-lack-of-belief
I appreciate you saying that because this vote is just incoherent and poorly constructed.
It's just unfortunate to me I suppose. Regardless this guy isn't a good debater in my opinion. Records are misleading and frankly, anyone can win a debate with an equitable resolution. Some of the people ascribed with this perception are simply just bad faith individuals who hardly ever have genuine challenges.
Well, i'm not blaming you or anything, I do understand people have things to do and that's fine, I am just frustrated with the results here because I think it's obvious that I am the rightful winner here.
Well, what can I say? Everyone knows I won this debate. I was robbed by some far left ideologue who clearly made a ridiculous RFD and did not understand the arguments made. The issue with this site isn't debates, it's the voters.
Here is a quote from someone who voted bombed for oromagi previously saying he still would have voted for him even if it was obvious he was losing.
> "I would have voted for oromagi if it looked like he was losing." (FLRW).
Do you think it's not a genuine issue to have someone openly admit he would vote against an individual even if he thought they won, for apparently no reason at all?
Do you know how annoying and it is to have challenged the" top ranked" debater on the platform, clearly and evidently defeated him argumentatively, and still "loose" the debate on record?
I did not expect such a quick debate given the time for argumentation. As it appears, the debate has ended whilst I was asleep.
I don't believe you just did that
Newer variations of the cosmological argument are inherently stronger.
I suspect your opponent will reveal these reasons to you within his time for argumentation.
Very weak affirmative case.
Okay, well, I was hoping to not have to forfeit, but it's a 5 round debate, so I don't suspect much is lost.
Yeah, fair enough. Thank you for being willing to vote here.
Don't know exactly what you are mentioning me for...but given your willingness to extend your argument in respect to the debates conclusion, it appears self evident that this comment holds far from any imperative to you.
I think you have to write much more then that, but I agree with the general outlook of your vote
It was a concession...
I'll vote when I can
PGA2. 0 put up a good performance in this debate
What's with whiteflame's profile picture? I was confused for a minute
Is this guy a troll?
Thanks for voting, but I would expand on you reasons. Other people like to see why people cast the votes they do
I actually would have voted, however, I don't yet have permission to do so.
Not surprising. As I said 12 days ago, the debste was a forgone conclusion
It's very funny from a personal standpoint. I would score the debate a draw by virtue of its entertainment. I also don't know how you manage to respond so quickly.
As an active user I hope you will consider voting, believing you are the most likely to be available.
Maybe you would be interested in voting based on a shown presence within the comment section.
Because that wasn't the topic? In the same way that the topic isn't "birds are good."
Mall may have won this debate. As this is my new account I do not yet have voting permissions, but I can evaluate that Rational Madman's output was much too low here.
Why did you make the voting period 60 days?
Yeah, I didn't expect such a performance. Very interesting. Very good job to the instigator here.
Would it not be better to make use of the quote feature in order to make the rebuttals more clear? It's hard for both readers and voters this way in my opinion.
Okay, so, if one is aware of the feeling of having read something so foolish/idiotic, but is meant to be serious, that is close to my current line of thoughts in respect to the comments section of this debate.
Why did you made two completely new arguments?
Is this a troll?
I may have made a mistake here in the comments, but it's hard to argue against the idea that God exists seeing as it is basically irrefutable
"Laurence Krauss has also tried to explain that a universe comes from nothing if there are pre existent quantum fluctuations. However these quantum fluctuations can only happen where there is time and space. And before the universe there was no time and space. Second of all pre existent timeless and spaceless quantum fluctuations are not a true nothing(a true nothing doesn't even have and are very similar to the necessary substance."
Quite intriguing
Too late
If I were making this debate, I would have included a rule that Barney may not vote
Look, I am a really humble person and I don't have much of an ego.
I honestly think you had a lot on your plate, and you didn't have time for this debate. That's 100% fine because we all have lives.
This is quite literally an extension of respect to your name because I know (and hopefully we can agree) that you should have won this debate.
Well we have to consider:
1. I have retired from debating
2. I am focusing on more challenging debates if i do decide to re-engage
Yeah, this debate just seems like a really easy win from my perspective.
I think Rational Madman was just busy.
I will say this, I agree that Bones won, I just think the votes casted were very poor in quality and extremely narrow minded.
I don't agree with the votes cast, but good job to both debaters.
I have made the transition to my new account, as you can see.
Interesting debate