SkinWalker said:
you still haven't demonstrated anything but your incompetence in debating.
Incompetent debating?
As I recall from the first time I have ever come across any one of your posts, you have always been one of those idiots who center their entire life debating opinions as if they were fact.
Shall I reiterate typical SW debates?
Paraphrasing, but close enough =>
CS: "Atheists are total morons."
SW: "I have provided lots of evidence that atheists are not total morons. Where is your hard evidence to prove that atheists are total morons?"
CS: "My hard evidence is in your idiotic statement asking me to prove that atheists are morons with hard evidence."
Let us now attempt to explain competent debating to an extremely dumb individual such as SW:
1. You cannot debate things that cannot be supported with empirical evidence.
2. Your 'hard evidence' that supposedly proves my statement wrong does not exist. There is no such thing as hard evidence that can prove an opinion wrong.
3. Any attempts to prove opinions lead to circular reasoning and the circular argument. As we see below:
SW: You have not provided evidence.
CS: Yes I have You are just to dumb to notice it.
SW: So it is true then. You have not provided hard evidence.
CS: The only thing that is true is that the more you post, idiotically asking me to support an opinion with hard evidence, the more my point is enforced.
SW: Unacceptable where is your hard evidence that atheists are morons.
CS: It is in most posts made by atheists. All posts in your case.
SW: Because you are unable to provide hard evidence, you must not have any.
CS: I have already provided this so called 'hard evidence' to support my statement that atheists are morons, and so have all you atheists with every one of your idiotic posts. Let us speculate. 10 posts mornically asking me to support an opinion with cold hard evidence as if that were possible = 10 posts supporting my assertion that atheists are indeed morons.
SW: Your debating tactics are incompetent because you cannot provide hard evidence supporting your assertion.
CS: Thank you for even more 'hard evidence' reinforcing your ultimate moronicism.
Now I shall translate this exact same dialogue.
SW: You have not provided evidence.
CS: Yes I have.
SW: No you have not.
CS: Yes I have.
SW: No you have not.
CS: Yes I have.
SW: No you have not.
CS: Yes I have.
SW: No you have not.
CS: Yes I have.
Such circular reasoning of back and forth dialogue that goes nowhere is a product of attempting to debate opinions.
Things idiots such as SW do:
1. Seriously debate opinions as if they were fact, and do so with a straight face.
2. Focus on debate tactics over actual intellectual discussion. (Because they are incapable of intellectual discussion.)
3. Troll around, and hijack threads. (Classic debate tactic with no regard for intellectual discussion.)
4. Worship ideas that cannot be proven as if they were cold hard fact.
Watch as Cool Skill states that most Scientists are theists.
Then watch as these idiots attempt to prove/disprove such a statement with empirical fact.
Unfortunately their belief that most Scientists are atheists is based on utter faith. This is because they are too dumb to realize that it is completely impossible prove that most Scientists are theists or atheists using empirical evidence. But of course to Skin Wacko, most scientist being atheists is not a belief but a cold hard fact supported by cold hard evidence. Can atheists be anymore psychotically fanatical than what is clearly exemplified by the idiot Skin Wacko?
Is this anything new? No. From the first I’ve ever seen of any of Skin Wacko’s responses to my posts he has done nothing but argue his utter speculation as if it were cold hard fact with empirical evidence to back it up. I can only conclude that such behavior is ‘cold hard evidence’ that Skin Wacko is unfathomably dolted beyond comprehension.
As for atheists, I guess all of the cold hard evidence could only point to the cold hard conclusion”
Atheists are indeed morons.
