My challenge

[Logical One]

I hereby challenge any atheist to challenge me to a public one-on-one debate on this forum topic. Whoever gets the most votes between now and 7PM ET will be the one I debate, so you forum members can decided. People are allowed to observe, however I urge not to post in this thread while the debate is going on. However I recommend posting between now and then offering to debate, and pledging your vote on which candidate should debate the side of atheism.
Is anyone willing to challenge me one-on-one? I await the response patiently.

[Mr.Obvious]

About?

[Logical One]

The topics will be chosen after the debater, obviously though the general theme will be Christianity vs. Atheism.

[Brian37]

I can have fun doing this, but please do realize any tactic you have used, such as trying to debunk science, or trying to co opt science, or "we own the patent on morality" have been done by people with other god claims too. I am not too much fun to debate for most because I treat all religions the same as being man made.

[leo]

Great idea ! bryant vs the logical One . I want to see this debate.

[Munch]

And what is this meant to accomplish? Some pretentious sense of satisfaction?

Heres how it will go down. If someone did this in a one on one debate, nothing will change. You will deny all evidence thrown at you in your god babble, no matter what is presented, even if its indisputable, you will deny it as so, call things like no true Scotsman fallacy, or Ad Ignorantiam, or straw manning.

Ultimately there will be nothing gained, because you won't have won anything, as you already believe your beliefs are the only true factor in any debate. The people debating you don't have gained anything, because your not shift your opinion or grow from it.

I am curious though in what you think your achieve from this however.

[Logical One]

And what is this meant to accomplish? Some pretentious sense of satisfaction?

Heres how it will go down. If someone did this in a one on one debate, nothing will change. You will deny all evidence thrown at you in your god babble, no matter what is presented, even if its indisputable, you will deny it as so, call things like no true Scotsman fallacy, or Ad Ignorantiam, or straw manning.

Ultimately there will be nothing gained, because you won't have won anything, as you already believe your beliefs are the only true factor in any debate. The people debating you don't have gained anything, because your not shift your opinion or grow from it.

I am curious though in what you think your achieve from this however.

Funny how you seem to know all already, hmm? Despite being an atheist, you seem to possess psychic abilities!
Then again of course[/] an atheist is never, ever wrong about anything, so why debate at all with the foolish Christian. Interesting how for someone who claims the other side is narrow-minded, you seem to have literally formulated what will happen in any argument with an opponent before such a thing occurs.

[Icarus]

The topics will be chosen after the debater, obviously though the general theme will be Christianity vs. Atheism.

Do you mean you want to debate the existence of a christian god? You're going to have one hell of a time, first you have to prove the existence of a god then prove that god is specifically the christian god and not some other god. This isn't something for a debate format, present the peer reviewed scientific literature outlining the existence of a chirstian god or you loose. Bravo.

[Logical One]

Do you mean you want to debate the existence of a christian god? You're going to have one hell of a time, first you have to prove the existence of a god then prove that god is specifically the christian god and not some other god. This isn't something for a debate format, present the peer reviewed scientific literature outlining the existence of a chirstian god or you loose. Bravo.

It must be nice to be able instantly dismiss a side because they can't back up your specific credentials. Shame I can't be that close-minded.

[hrdlr110]

I wouldn't debate you for the same reason I don't play chess againt pigeons!

[hrdlr110]

It must be nice to be able instantly dismiss a side because they can't back up your specific credentials. Shame I can't be that close-minded.

A version of the Dunning Kruger affect, that is what the logical one suffers from. He's so closed minded that he doesn't realise just how closed minded he is. Yet he wishes he could be more closed minded.....? So, you're slamming someone for being closed minded, but at the same time wishing you could be more like them? Is this how you will debate?

[PickelledEggs]

Lol This should be fun. Who wants to be the mediator? we can set it up in the formal debate section.

[trdsf]

I should greatly prefer to see the topic settled first.  Then it's time to look for a debate partner, and settle the ground rules.

[Munch]

Funny how you seem to know all already, hmm? Despite being an atheist, you seem to possess psychic abilities!
Then again of course[/] an atheist is never, ever wrong about anything, so why debate at all with the foolish Christian. Interesting how for someone who claims the other side is narrow-minded, you seem to have literally formulated what will happen in any argument with an opponent before such a thing occurs.

you guys called it psychic powers, we call it having intuition

[Solomon Zorn]

I nominate Mr.O - he's got the patience for it. But I wouldn't expect anybody to do it, not knowing in advance the topic.

And 7pm est just passed.