This was 3 round debate and, I extended my arguments from 1st round and explained them in more detail. There were no new arguments, it was not my headache to leave the 3rd round empty while my opponent just made a fancy video probably no one looked it and thought they should ignore my part as well. I do not know what you are doing. But I can see the credibility.
Materialistic approaches of scientists:
While materialist scientists, such as J. Allan Hobson and Francis Crick, have provided fascinating insights into the physiological mechanics of dreams, they often focus on the "how" rather than the "why." For example:
1. Mechanics vs. Purpose: Studies like the Activation-Synthesis Theory explain how neural signals during REM sleep create dreams, but they do not explain why specific dreams contain meaningful or predictive content that often aligns with real-life events.
2. Limitations of Science: As acknowledged by scientists like Christof Koch, we have not yet fully understood consciousness. If science cannot explain the full extent of waking consciousness, how can it conclusively dismiss spiritual dimensions of the unconscious mind?
3. Room for Interpretation: Even neuroscientists like Antonio Damasio admit the complexity of mental processes. This leaves room for phenomena beyond the scope of current methodologies, such as spiritual interpretations of dreams.
4. Unexplained Predictive Dreams: The testimonies and experiences of individuals with dreams that accurately predict future events remain an area that science has not fully explored or explained. This gap suggests there may be more to dreams than mere brain activity.
Hard problem of consciousness:
The problem of consciousness is often divided into two main challenges:
1. The Hard Problem of Consciousness refers to one of the most profound challenges in understanding the human mind, as introduced by philosopher David Chalmers.
Core Aspects of the Hard Problem:
1. Subjective Experience:
Science can explain the brain's mechanisms (neuronal activity, sensory processing), but it cannot explain why these mechanisms result in the subjective experience of "what it feels like" to see, hear, or think.
2. Qualia:
This refers to the individual, subjective sensations we experience, like the redness of red or the pain of a headache. These are inherently personal and cannot be directly observed or measured.
3. Mind-Brain Gap:
There's a significant gap between the objective study of the brain's physical processes and the subjective nature of consciousness.
Examples in Action:
Why does seeing a sunset produce a feeling of awe, rather than just a mechanical processing of light waves?
Why do dreams sometimes feel vivid and meaningful, even though they are products of unconscious brain activity?
Why It’s “Hard”:
Unlike the "easy problems" of consciousness (e.g., understanding brain functions like perception, memory, or attention), the hard problem cannot be studied purely through objective measures like brain scans or neural activity. It ventures into questions about the fundamental nature of reality, bridging science, philosophy, and spirituality.
This challenge leaves room for multiple interpretations, including metaphysical and spiritual perspectives, as science does not yet have a definitive answer.
The Question: How and why does physical brain activity (neurons firing, chemical reactions) produce subjective experiences, such as thoughts, emotions, and sensations?
The Mystery: While science can explain the mechanisms of the brain (e.g., neurons processing sensory input), it cannot yet explain qualia—the subjective, first-person experience of being conscious (e.g., what it feels like to see red or taste sweetness).
2. The Easy Problems of Consciousness
These refer to understanding the mechanisms underlying brain functions like:
Perception, memory, attention, and decision-making.
For example, how sensory data is processed or how we focus on specific tasks.
While called "easy," these problems are complex, but they are more approachable because they can be studied empirically.
Hard Problems Related to Consciousness
Here are some key challenges:
a. Consciousness vs. Unconsciousness
How does the brain transition between states of consciousness, such as sleep, dreaming, and wakefulness?
Why do dreams have meaning or feel vivid, even though they arise in an unconscious state?
b. Integration
How does the brain integrate information from multiple sources (e.g., vision, sound, memory) into a single unified experience of "self"?
c. Free Will
Is the experience of making choices a real phenomenon, or is it just the brain rationalizing decisions it has already made unconsciously?
d. Brain and Mind Connection
What is the exact relationship between the physical brain (neurons, chemicals) and the non-physical mind (thoughts, emotions, awareness)?
Why These Problems Matter
Consciousness lies at the heart of what it means to be human. While science has made great strides in understanding brain mechanisms, it still cannot fully explain the nature or origins of consciousness, leaving room for philosophical, spiritual, and metaphysical interpretations.
There is significant scientific research suggesting that our brains initiate decisions before we become consciously aware of them.
Conclusion:
1.
As we can see dreams are not physical, because they are images, visions and sensations of unconscious mind.
2.
Dreams originates in mind which is
Non materialistic part of brain and science does not know anything about it because science only operates into physical realm.
3.
Science does not know consciousness of mind and claiming to know everything related to unconscious mind is not understable. Mind being conscious or unconscious both are out of physical dimension although it's very much related to the brain.
4.
Dreams or unconscious mind or even thoughts of consciousness mind are not materialistic so my opponent's claim to know their nature and origin is baseless.
5.
Dream being not physical suggest that if they are measured or examined physical would not be the realistic approach to deal which is not physical.
6.
As dreams are most probably related to spirit or soul so they might be wholy spiritual, we can conclude them at this point.
7.
Our personal experiences effects dreams, and this category is identified by islam. We can say that our physical existence or parts like brain can effect the dreams. But oh the other hand we can say that our actions can effects our spirit or soul and yet finally effect the unconscious mind so our dreams too.
8.
My opponent shall not feel insult if I mentioned his belief to be atheist.
A person who deny diety and religion and spiritual existence is enough to conclude that the person is atheist.
9.
I mentioned Richard dunkin because my opponent is already talking about science and scientist so talking about someone who even has direct quote about this matter should be relavent.
10.
I have proven that dreams are a product of the unconscious mind which is not physical and not understood by science at any level. So considering them spiritual or metaphysical should be considered more meaningful and proven with multiple verified examples given in this round and previous rounds.
11.
I personally received may spiritual dreams among which I have mentioned one which is very special and profound in my life.
12.
My opponent just presented assumptions and even did not quote the finding by scientist on this matter. Just few modified definitions.
13.
This topic is very vast and impossible to be discussed perfectly in 3 round debate.
14.
I invite voters to read debate completely and reflect unbiased genuine vote in the favour of who deserve to win.
15.
I still apologize to my opponent if anything let him feel disrespectful and I will try my best to be more in up coming debates with anyone.
16.
I have talked in last round about the most important and driving force of universe is unknown to scientists and even other weak and strong forces are
Islamic information was only responding about 3 types of dreams while my main arguments were scientific and you are framing me again here being religious and undermining it's false without proof.
You did very less in debate, most of your debate was quotes from me and little response for them.
They overlooked my whole debate and solid arguments. All dreams being physical and their interpretation could be spiritual was my argument.
I have proven it how science do not know about consciousness, let alone unconscious mind which govern dreams.
So disappointed
Nope because, they are atheists not because you made solid arguements.
What they are claiming in RFDs I have dealt with it already and in great detail. I have talked in scientific prospect as well. But they only read half part of debate and gave decision..
If we know how flowers bloom, does it means God do not exist? Knowing the mechanism of something do not negate God .
For that see my video how atheism got into us.
Knowledge is not negation of God but proof of God. Christian apologist gave to he vibe and sentiment of science the opposition of theism. While science compliment Islam.
I should have been concise so that they cannot overlook my main arguments while I try to give as much info as I can. But tbh both votes are personal bias
Plz, man it's so bad, it's definition of firm believe not faith.
And paraphrasing is not allowed for definition from dictionary. That is why we use reputable dictionary not personal one.
And I am not debating firm believe but spirituality and religion. And you responded, shall I go in detail and show why your vote is vote bomb.
There is difference between firm believe and believe. Also here it's not about faith but a personal believe on so personal matter not religion .
The ultimate problem with relying on faith is that anything can be claimed, argued, and said without being able to confirm it. This is because faith is defined as believing without knowing. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith
Can you show me where it says in link?
You gave him for source while misqouting source cause the loss of source point.
Guys
Can you see, that is why theism is just personal bias and falsehood of scientists who develop their career on their personal theories which are declared false later on.
If proven to be true then they get the idea from religion.
Another vote bomb based on my only first round. No counter arguments read and considered from savant.
Atheist should not be immune, do not repeat DDO's mistakes.
Plz red 2nd and 3rd round as well. First round was was kind of introduction, for the sake of just and honest opinion.
Your vote is also vote bomb. Bro I changed my stance in 2nd and 3rd round. Come on do not be biased.
Why the fck I debate if u guys do not read it full.
Let me take only this statement from you.
/6
Undermining the Use of Religious Evidence
Is a fair point to make, and a consistent theme that Con has argued.
People of different beliefs, will often lack the presuppositions required to take the claims of different beliefs at face value. I think.
. . . Though one 'can argue science is not a monolith, not 'all groups believe in the same scientific claims.
This shows you have not read my debate.
You are saying just like my opponent, more clear to say, you are trying to debate to debate with me here and imposing your personal believe. Any debate is not about changing someone's personal believe. We only see evidence, no matter the source of arguemnt come from.
You cannot discard my religious argument because its religious.
First let me tell you why.
First this topic is about spiritual or divine meaning attached to dreams so it's inevitable to talk about religion as the topic at hand is religion that is why I took this debate. I do not know why sometimes people are so dumb.
2nd
It does not matter is argument come from religion or something else you cannot discard right away without analysing it, if it's logical Nd make sense and is strong argument then you have to see the strength and relevance of the arguement not your personal biased judgement to discard it right away because you are atheist, both my opponent and you did it right away.
3rd.
When I stated the religion or used religious information it was relevent to the arguement where my opponent mentioned about forgetting of dreams. So I gave religious information about that not 100% dreams are considered spiritual or divine.
But there are some, it is common with all religions.
So it was information regarding that point.
I went in Great length to respond scientifically against my opponent. I am sure you did not read final argument.
Debating with me is not hard in fact voting is even more harder. Because my debates are very long.
This shows your personal bias. And argument of religion was nothing but you explain types of dreams and not completely for main argument.
Also my opponents's arguemnt was I do not believe dreams have spiritual meaning because I do not believe spirituality.
And your vote says same.
Are your children guys?
Lol
If I argue with your RFD, I can prove your vote bomb. Keep in mind I have done this on DDO, once I voted against naqash matwadi who was
an atheist and I was 1 voter and I gave all 7 points to he Muslim guy and 6 votes were in favour or naqash. So jury sit on my vote and I proven to naqash that my vote was not vote bomb by debating with him in comment section which was like whole another debate. So I left voting on DDO because of that headache. And my first debate, there were about near 50 votes on it and all great debators who never lost even one debate, voted in my favour. That was enough for me to be right. But so many vote bomb I could not do anything then. But then I come to know that I can appeal for it. I am getting a lot of vote bomb or biased votes for my debates. I put a lot of efforts for this debate.
But you did not read my arguments which is very sad to see. You gave him for resources while he mis quote all resources and presented wrong information from the definitions. I am sure you never checked them. You did not read my arguments at all. Do you what me to prove your vote bomb against me? And you are biased here?
I already told in last round that voting on my debate is not easy I do not let it go. You should have been careful. Even on my other debates the moderator himself vote bomb. If this keep going then this website will end up LIKE DDO
I consider this vote bomb, I want the voter to give concise RFD not another debate in which he present bible verses and argument. He should not forget he is voter and whatever is in debate, should be voted for that.
Are you debating with me?
Give a concise RFD, and do not impose your belief on me. I do not know why you gave vote to my opponent. I do not know why I have to debate separately with voters all the time.
There are many studies done on mother's age and birth defects.
Basically, the older the mother is, child is more likely to have autism, down syndrome or some other illness.
Aging cause decay or your chromosomes and DNA codes, that is why old people are prone to cancer because of DNA damage.
That is why early marriage and kids are important, some say you should have what you want before 30 because after that birth defects.
My daughter has infantile hamiongioma. I wish me and wife had married earlier.
That is why islam encourage early marriage. People are non sense to question divine guidance.
My little bro, do not take it to heart, you mentioned about scientist before so I responded to that, and intellectually dishonest I said because you assumed religion false with the vampire example without even debated with me about this topic. How can you preasume religion false and gave vampire example. I responded to that. Everything I said was pre calculated and necessary..
Still if you are looking for respect and manners, by the command of Allah I have no right to be disrespectful to anybody.
I am toxic with toxic people. But by nature I do not like clashes and duels, this is debating platform where intellectual come and discuss their differences by debates and intellectual strength not disrespect. Mostly athiest are toxic and it's natural because their moral ground lies into nature. Which suggest survival of the fittest. We believes are bound by divine morality to behave well. Yet if a atheist demand it then it's great. So for that I say sorry. And let's move on.
I never disrespected you, in fact in this debate I remain to the point, I do not know why you felt disrespectful. Tbh this was my best debate regarding respect, check my other debates they were far worse. I never thought of disrespectful at any instance in debate. Everything I said was for the sake of arguemnt. I do not know why you felt that way. Can you mentioned where my tone was disrespectful in last 2 rounds plz?
Kid, you are already fked in debate why eating my brain here, you have not seen my toxicity yet. It's better you stop your poop eating monkey brain. And get the fk out of here. You have done the debate why eating sh8t here?
Brain dead person asking me to give empirical evidence of dream while it's totally related to subjective and personal interpretation and none machine or tool or measure invented which can analyse the content of dream and then coorelate it with mere physical or spiritual phenomenon. Your brain was tard when you instigated this debate. Probably you had argument with some guy in real life
Now you are fked up, so crying in comment section and you reached the point, where you choose the appealing to the audience/voters by Dropping arguments and appeal to emotion.
If you have done well, you would have not begged to voters and by passing me.
Pathetic
You right away discarded my stance which was religion, when you discuss spiritual matters, they automatically belongs to religion. Yet you right away said "They also relied primarily on their own subjective experiences and religious interpretations as opposed to facts, evidence, or anything academic"
You said you would believe something come out of empirical analysis.
And so on,
Probably you are a kid, you do not know what you are saying and what that means.
My response was according to your response and also adequate.
Do not cry bro.
There is no problem in it bible is word of Allah but it got corrupted partially.
So you got to change the resolution.abour corruption.
Also make 5 rounds each 30000 chars. Also 2 week arguemnt time and min 3 month voting period.
Do not bring irrelevant topics. 3 round and even 1 debate is not enough for it. I needed to delete some part and end up deleting little more. So tired so did not add again or added more. If you want we can start another debate about that.
Its matter of fact people do not know about Islam much.
In my debate there are three elements.
1 debating
2 education
3 preaching
That is why I formulate arguments like that.
Thank you all
This was 3 round debate and, I extended my arguments from 1st round and explained them in more detail. There were no new arguments, it was not my headache to leave the 3rd round empty while my opponent just made a fancy video probably no one looked it and thought they should ignore my part as well. I do not know what you are doing. But I can see the credibility.
What is the purpose of so many rounds if people are not going to read more then 1 round.
Hahaha, voting for forfeited debate, what a gift. Go vote for dream debate then I would say you have done something against atheist vote bomber.
Do you find science in last comment?
Materialistic approaches of scientists:
While materialist scientists, such as J. Allan Hobson and Francis Crick, have provided fascinating insights into the physiological mechanics of dreams, they often focus on the "how" rather than the "why." For example:
1. Mechanics vs. Purpose: Studies like the Activation-Synthesis Theory explain how neural signals during REM sleep create dreams, but they do not explain why specific dreams contain meaningful or predictive content that often aligns with real-life events.
2. Limitations of Science: As acknowledged by scientists like Christof Koch, we have not yet fully understood consciousness. If science cannot explain the full extent of waking consciousness, how can it conclusively dismiss spiritual dimensions of the unconscious mind?
3. Room for Interpretation: Even neuroscientists like Antonio Damasio admit the complexity of mental processes. This leaves room for phenomena beyond the scope of current methodologies, such as spiritual interpretations of dreams.
4. Unexplained Predictive Dreams: The testimonies and experiences of individuals with dreams that accurately predict future events remain an area that science has not fully explored or explained. This gap suggests there may be more to dreams than mere brain activity.
Hard problem of consciousness:
The problem of consciousness is often divided into two main challenges:
1. The Hard Problem of Consciousness refers to one of the most profound challenges in understanding the human mind, as introduced by philosopher David Chalmers.
Core Aspects of the Hard Problem:
1. Subjective Experience:
Science can explain the brain's mechanisms (neuronal activity, sensory processing), but it cannot explain why these mechanisms result in the subjective experience of "what it feels like" to see, hear, or think.
2. Qualia:
This refers to the individual, subjective sensations we experience, like the redness of red or the pain of a headache. These are inherently personal and cannot be directly observed or measured.
3. Mind-Brain Gap:
There's a significant gap between the objective study of the brain's physical processes and the subjective nature of consciousness.
Examples in Action:
Why does seeing a sunset produce a feeling of awe, rather than just a mechanical processing of light waves?
Why do dreams sometimes feel vivid and meaningful, even though they are products of unconscious brain activity?
Why It’s “Hard”:
Unlike the "easy problems" of consciousness (e.g., understanding brain functions like perception, memory, or attention), the hard problem cannot be studied purely through objective measures like brain scans or neural activity. It ventures into questions about the fundamental nature of reality, bridging science, philosophy, and spirituality.
This challenge leaves room for multiple interpretations, including metaphysical and spiritual perspectives, as science does not yet have a definitive answer.
The Question: How and why does physical brain activity (neurons firing, chemical reactions) produce subjective experiences, such as thoughts, emotions, and sensations?
The Mystery: While science can explain the mechanisms of the brain (e.g., neurons processing sensory input), it cannot yet explain qualia—the subjective, first-person experience of being conscious (e.g., what it feels like to see red or taste sweetness).
2. The Easy Problems of Consciousness
These refer to understanding the mechanisms underlying brain functions like:
Perception, memory, attention, and decision-making.
For example, how sensory data is processed or how we focus on specific tasks.
While called "easy," these problems are complex, but they are more approachable because they can be studied empirically.
Hard Problems Related to Consciousness
Here are some key challenges:
a. Consciousness vs. Unconsciousness
How does the brain transition between states of consciousness, such as sleep, dreaming, and wakefulness?
Why do dreams have meaning or feel vivid, even though they arise in an unconscious state?
b. Integration
How does the brain integrate information from multiple sources (e.g., vision, sound, memory) into a single unified experience of "self"?
c. Free Will
Is the experience of making choices a real phenomenon, or is it just the brain rationalizing decisions it has already made unconsciously?
d. Brain and Mind Connection
What is the exact relationship between the physical brain (neurons, chemicals) and the non-physical mind (thoughts, emotions, awareness)?
Why These Problems Matter
Consciousness lies at the heart of what it means to be human. While science has made great strides in understanding brain mechanisms, it still cannot fully explain the nature or origins of consciousness, leaving room for philosophical, spiritual, and metaphysical interpretations.
There is significant scientific research suggesting that our brains initiate decisions before we become consciously aware of them.
Conclusion:
1.
As we can see dreams are not physical, because they are images, visions and sensations of unconscious mind.
2.
Dreams originates in mind which is
Non materialistic part of brain and science does not know anything about it because science only operates into physical realm.
3.
Science does not know consciousness of mind and claiming to know everything related to unconscious mind is not understable. Mind being conscious or unconscious both are out of physical dimension although it's very much related to the brain.
4.
Dreams or unconscious mind or even thoughts of consciousness mind are not materialistic so my opponent's claim to know their nature and origin is baseless.
5.
Dream being not physical suggest that if they are measured or examined physical would not be the realistic approach to deal which is not physical.
6.
As dreams are most probably related to spirit or soul so they might be wholy spiritual, we can conclude them at this point.
7.
Our personal experiences effects dreams, and this category is identified by islam. We can say that our physical existence or parts like brain can effect the dreams. But oh the other hand we can say that our actions can effects our spirit or soul and yet finally effect the unconscious mind so our dreams too.
8.
My opponent shall not feel insult if I mentioned his belief to be atheist.
A person who deny diety and religion and spiritual existence is enough to conclude that the person is atheist.
9.
I mentioned Richard dunkin because my opponent is already talking about science and scientist so talking about someone who even has direct quote about this matter should be relavent.
10.
I have proven that dreams are a product of the unconscious mind which is not physical and not understood by science at any level. So considering them spiritual or metaphysical should be considered more meaningful and proven with multiple verified examples given in this round and previous rounds.
11.
I personally received may spiritual dreams among which I have mentioned one which is very special and profound in my life.
12.
My opponent just presented assumptions and even did not quote the finding by scientist on this matter. Just few modified definitions.
13.
This topic is very vast and impossible to be discussed perfectly in 3 round debate.
14.
I invite voters to read debate completely and reflect unbiased genuine vote in the favour of who deserve to win.
15.
I still apologize to my opponent if anything let him feel disrespectful and I will try my best to be more in up coming debates with anyone.
16.
I have talked in last round about the most important and driving force of universe is unknown to scientists and even other weak and strong forces are
Islamic information was only responding about 3 types of dreams while my main arguments were scientific and you are framing me again here being religious and undermining it's false without proof.
You did very less in debate, most of your debate was quotes from me and little response for them.
They overlooked my whole debate and solid arguments. All dreams being physical and their interpretation could be spiritual was my argument.
I have proven it how science do not know about consciousness, let alone unconscious mind which govern dreams.
So disappointed
Nope because, they are atheists not because you made solid arguements.
What they are claiming in RFDs I have dealt with it already and in great detail. I have talked in scientific prospect as well. But they only read half part of debate and gave decision..
If we know how flowers bloom, does it means God do not exist? Knowing the mechanism of something do not negate God .
For that see my video how atheism got into us.
Knowledge is not negation of God but proof of God. Christian apologist gave to he vibe and sentiment of science the opposition of theism. While science compliment Islam.
I should have been concise so that they cannot overlook my main arguments while I try to give as much info as I can. But tbh both votes are personal bias
I will make YouTube video about this debate show how biased people are when they are atheists in debates.
Plz, man it's so bad, it's definition of firm believe not faith.
And paraphrasing is not allowed for definition from dictionary. That is why we use reputable dictionary not personal one.
And I am not debating firm believe but spirituality and religion. And you responded, shall I go in detail and show why your vote is vote bomb.
There is difference between firm believe and believe. Also here it's not about faith but a personal believe on so personal matter not religion .
The ultimate problem with relying on faith is that anything can be claimed, argued, and said without being able to confirm it. This is because faith is defined as believing without knowing. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith
Can you show me where it says in link?
You gave him for source while misqouting source cause the loss of source point.
Guys
Can you see, that is why theism is just personal bias and falsehood of scientists who develop their career on their personal theories which are declared false later on.
If proven to be true then they get the idea from religion.
Shame
You can't debate me at all. A person who needs 100000 words for RFD and personal arguments can't debate me.
I won't let it go this time.
It's complete joke tbh
Another vote bomb based on my only first round. No counter arguments read and considered from savant.
Atheist should not be immune, do not repeat DDO's mistakes.
Plz red 2nd and 3rd round as well. First round was was kind of introduction, for the sake of just and honest opinion.
Your vote is also vote bomb. Bro I changed my stance in 2nd and 3rd round. Come on do not be biased.
Why the fck I debate if u guys do not read it full.
Dream is not bout dreams and it's cause but the interpretation of dreams which do not involve science read full debate.
Let me take only this statement from you.
/6
Undermining the Use of Religious Evidence
Is a fair point to make, and a consistent theme that Con has argued.
People of different beliefs, will often lack the presuppositions required to take the claims of different beliefs at face value. I think.
. . . Though one 'can argue science is not a monolith, not 'all groups believe in the same scientific claims.
This shows you have not read my debate.
You are saying just like my opponent, more clear to say, you are trying to debate to debate with me here and imposing your personal believe. Any debate is not about changing someone's personal believe. We only see evidence, no matter the source of arguemnt come from.
You cannot discard my religious argument because its religious.
First let me tell you why.
First this topic is about spiritual or divine meaning attached to dreams so it's inevitable to talk about religion as the topic at hand is religion that is why I took this debate. I do not know why sometimes people are so dumb.
2nd
It does not matter is argument come from religion or something else you cannot discard right away without analysing it, if it's logical Nd make sense and is strong argument then you have to see the strength and relevance of the arguement not your personal biased judgement to discard it right away because you are atheist, both my opponent and you did it right away.
3rd.
When I stated the religion or used religious information it was relevent to the arguement where my opponent mentioned about forgetting of dreams. So I gave religious information about that not 100% dreams are considered spiritual or divine.
But there are some, it is common with all religions.
So it was information regarding that point.
I went in Great length to respond scientifically against my opponent. I am sure you did not read final argument.
Debating with me is not hard in fact voting is even more harder. Because my debates are very long.
This shows your personal bias. And argument of religion was nothing but you explain types of dreams and not completely for main argument.
Also my opponents's arguemnt was I do not believe dreams have spiritual meaning because I do not believe spirituality.
And your vote says same.
Are your children guys?
Lol
If I argue with your RFD, I can prove your vote bomb. Keep in mind I have done this on DDO, once I voted against naqash matwadi who was
an atheist and I was 1 voter and I gave all 7 points to he Muslim guy and 6 votes were in favour or naqash. So jury sit on my vote and I proven to naqash that my vote was not vote bomb by debating with him in comment section which was like whole another debate. So I left voting on DDO because of that headache. And my first debate, there were about near 50 votes on it and all great debators who never lost even one debate, voted in my favour. That was enough for me to be right. But so many vote bomb I could not do anything then. But then I come to know that I can appeal for it. I am getting a lot of vote bomb or biased votes for my debates. I put a lot of efforts for this debate.
But you did not read my arguments which is very sad to see. You gave him for resources while he mis quote all resources and presented wrong information from the definitions. I am sure you never checked them. You did not read my arguments at all. Do you what me to prove your vote bomb against me? And you are biased here?
I have read it, it's personal bias, he is arguing with me on his own arguments not what debator has done with me.
I already told in last round that voting on my debate is not easy I do not let it go. You should have been careful. Even on my other debates the moderator himself vote bomb. If this keep going then this website will end up LIKE DDO
This has reached the quality of votes on this website, I have to debate with voter now.
I consider this vote bomb, I want the voter to give concise RFD not another debate in which he present bible verses and argument. He should not forget he is voter and whatever is in debate, should be voted for that.
Are you debating with me?
Give a concise RFD, and do not impose your belief on me. I do not know why you gave vote to my opponent. I do not know why I have to debate separately with voters all the time.
No one votes?
This debate was amusing. Lol
There are many studies done on mother's age and birth defects.
Basically, the older the mother is, child is more likely to have autism, down syndrome or some other illness.
Aging cause decay or your chromosomes and DNA codes, that is why old people are prone to cancer because of DNA damage.
That is why early marriage and kids are important, some say you should have what you want before 30 because after that birth defects.
My daughter has infantile hamiongioma. I wish me and wife had married earlier.
That is why islam encourage early marriage. People are non sense to question divine guidance.
Np bro, it's alright, but it seems the guy is not going to post any argument as he was online 4 days ago. But let's see he may come.
I am blocked check, I do not know why.
Well it seems these guys are not going to debate it. But probably they would ff it.
My little bro, do not take it to heart, you mentioned about scientist before so I responded to that, and intellectually dishonest I said because you assumed religion false with the vampire example without even debated with me about this topic. How can you preasume religion false and gave vampire example. I responded to that. Everything I said was pre calculated and necessary..
Still if you are looking for respect and manners, by the command of Allah I have no right to be disrespectful to anybody.
I am toxic with toxic people. But by nature I do not like clashes and duels, this is debating platform where intellectual come and discuss their differences by debates and intellectual strength not disrespect. Mostly athiest are toxic and it's natural because their moral ground lies into nature. Which suggest survival of the fittest. We believes are bound by divine morality to behave well. Yet if a atheist demand it then it's great. So for that I say sorry. And let's move on.
I never disrespected you, in fact in this debate I remain to the point, I do not know why you felt disrespectful. Tbh this was my best debate regarding respect, check my other debates they were far worse. I never thought of disrespectful at any instance in debate. Everything I said was for the sake of arguemnt. I do not know why you felt that way. Can you mentioned where my tone was disrespectful in last 2 rounds plz?
Waste of time, you r not my caliber, bye bye and burn
Yes, but someone else took.
Kid, you are already fked in debate why eating my brain here, you have not seen my toxicity yet. It's better you stop your poop eating monkey brain. And get the fk out of here. You have done the debate why eating sh8t here?
Brain dead person asking me to give empirical evidence of dream while it's totally related to subjective and personal interpretation and none machine or tool or measure invented which can analyse the content of dream and then coorelate it with mere physical or spiritual phenomenon. Your brain was tard when you instigated this debate. Probably you had argument with some guy in real life
Now you are fked up, so crying in comment section and you reached the point, where you choose the appealing to the audience/voters by Dropping arguments and appeal to emotion.
If you have done well, you would have not begged to voters and by passing me.
Pathetic
She probably blocked you as well. Otherwise she was active 3 hours ago.
Kid grow up, you are asking me to give you physical evidence for a dream, lmao.
Wylted
Shut up, what are you talking about?
Do not jerk off here, just let me know, and I will debate with you.
You right away discarded my stance which was religion, when you discuss spiritual matters, they automatically belongs to religion. Yet you right away said "They also relied primarily on their own subjective experiences and religious interpretations as opposed to facts, evidence, or anything academic"
You said you would believe something come out of empirical analysis.
And so on,
Probably you are a kid, you do not know what you are saying and what that means.
My response was according to your response and also adequate.
Do not cry bro.
This guy is so lazy.
There is no problem in it bible is word of Allah but it got corrupted partially.
So you got to change the resolution.abour corruption.
Also make 5 rounds each 30000 chars. Also 2 week arguemnt time and min 3 month voting period.
Do not bring irrelevant topics. 3 round and even 1 debate is not enough for it. I needed to delete some part and end up deleting little more. So tired so did not add again or added more. If you want we can start another debate about that.
Looking forward for good debate, I shall share my own experiences about dream which comes true.
Why left debate
Barney wants debate with me?
Plz vote
Plz vote
Underdog
I can do debate with atheist. No problem at all.
Any one wants, come forward.
Now wana debate?
Its matter of fact people do not know about Islam much.
In my debate there are three elements.
1 debating
2 education
3 preaching
That is why I formulate arguments like that.
Thank you all
Ok on Saturday I will instigate it.