Who has the guts to debate an expert? [Trollville]

god rules
Theist
Posts: 49
Joined: 2007-06-26
User is offlineOffline
Who has the guts to debate an expert? [Trollville]

I don't personally have the knowledge @ this time to debate you guys but i know someone who does. Would any of you administrators or owners of this organization consider going on the Bob Dutko Show to debate Christianity vs. Atheism? Would you be willing to stand up 4 your beliefs in debating the BEST! Confronting wishy washy Christians does not merit any credibility to your stance on atheism. Arguing your position with someone intelligent who knows the word of God does. His show is on wmuz.com out of detroit. He has the largest Christian audience in the country. Your thoughts. [mod edit from Sapient: WE ALREADY WERE ON HIS SHOW. READ MY POST BELOW]


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10725
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
god rules wrote: Vastet

god rules wrote:
Vastet wrote:
I left this topic for awhile before looking at it due to the huge number of responses, and now I find that my entire response can be summed up by two previous posts by site members.
Hambydammit wrote:
You know what I've noticed?  All these "Master Debaters" we hear so much about apparently don't have the "guts" to come to RRS and put their masterful proofs of god into print.
Sapient wrote:
Kelly was already on Bob Dutko. He was extremely dishonest in how he set up the discussion. He purposefully ambushed her on topics of thermodynamics when we specifically stated in the preinterview that our science expert was Mike Yellow #5. During the interview she stated her expertise was not science, but philosophy and psychology... she did so several times. Each time he continued to force issues of thermodynamics that she specifically stated were not her area of expertise and then claimed victory in that she wasn't informed of the topic. If you happen to see the dishonest twat bag, feel free to spit in his face for us. He hasn't accepted or returned the email to receive an appearance on our show. Dishonest pussy is all I can say for him. In addition our RRS partner Brian Flemming was on Dutko twice.
There's really nothing else to say.
Then you are just as your fellow atheists, living in denial. Avoiding the truth.

I'm sorry to inform you that you are projecting your own flaws onto me. Just like your fellow theists constantly do in desperation to avoid their belief system collapsing on itself. Sadly most of them succeed. For now.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
god rules wrote: jcgadfly

god rules wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
god rules wrote:
Sapient wrote:
god rules wrote:

hey Yellow Number 5,

I have a challenge for you. Why don't you call Bob on his show 3:00-4:00pm EST on any friday to challenge him on thermodynamics since you feel Kelly was allegedly put on the spot. Put your money where your mouth is.

$5 says Bob changes the topic to something other than science.

That is all speculation.

And you still haven't come across with links where he's debated any experts. Does your guy just take on amateurs on his show (where he has all the control), ask questions out of people's areas and crow about his "wins"?

Y'all are full of excuses. Why don't you ask Michael Shermur or Victor Stenger themselves. It seems to me you should be familiar with these individuals since they are atheists and have spent time in your arena.

Two reasons:

1. I don't know either of them.

2. You brought them up as experts that your boy had debated. 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
What amazes me is that this

What amazes me is that this thread has made it to four pages.


simple theist
Theist
Posts: 259
Joined: 2007-05-28
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: simple

wavefreak wrote:
simple theist wrote:

I would not pay wavefreak, ever, if I had a radio show. There is nothing in it for me. Plenty of people willing to do it for free and plenty of more qualified people to spend my money on getting on a show. From a business stanpoint, it wouldn't be worth it. If you had any real qualifications, then you might be worth money, but you don't. I could take the money you want me to spend on you, and spend it on someone qualified and with a degree in whatever we would be debating.

That is your right. You also still don't recognize that nature of business. Demanding an appearance fee is a perfectly reasonable opening gambit in a negotiation. Bob could counter offer with no appearance fee, but the other things can be worked with. But no counter offer has come up. Call during his show is the only option given.

Did you miss the part where I offered to do a debate in writing? Neutral territory? No appearance fee?

 

It should also be pointed out that Bob doesn't read or post here to my knowledge. 


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10725
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Perhaps he should change

Perhaps he should change that if he's so sure of himself.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


simple theist
Theist
Posts: 259
Joined: 2007-05-28
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: What

wavefreak wrote:
What amazes me is that this thread has made it to four pages.

 

What amazes me is that this post has made it to four pages with  Sapient still claiming Kelly was ambushed, but hasn't refuted God Rules description of the event. Which shows Kelly wasn't ambushed, and Kelly actually started talking about science.


simple theist
Theist
Posts: 259
Joined: 2007-05-28
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote: Perhaps he

Vastet wrote:
Perhaps he should change that if he's so sure of himself.
I believe there is little reason for a Christian to actually come here. There hasn't been a post to made here that makes me dount my Christianity, in fact every post that is posted makes me believe Christianity even more.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Geez... I vote that all of

Geez... I vote that all of you just drop your drawers, get out the ruler, and declare a winner.

I'll let everybody in on a couple of secrets...

1) He's not coming to this board to post

2) Nobody from here is going on his show again.

3) This conversation is a waste of everyone's valuable time on the planet.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: Geez...

Hambydammit wrote:

Geez... I vote that all of you just drop your drawers, get out the ruler, and declare a winner.

I'll let everybody in on a couple of secrets...

1) He's not coming to this board to post

2) Nobody from here is going on his show again.

3) This conversation is a waste of everyone's valuable time on the planet.

 

 

Can I borrow your Rambo Kitty? 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
simple theist

simple theist wrote:

wavefreak wrote:
What amazes me is that this thread has made it to four pages.

 

What amazes me is that this post has made it to four pages with Sapient still claiming Kelly was ambushed, but hasn't refuted God Rules description of the event. Which shows Kelly wasn't ambushed, and Kelly actually started talking about science.

Strange.

Sapient tells you that he thinks Kelly was ambushed. 

Y#5 tells you that he heard the show and thinks that Kelly was ambushed (refuting god_rules description of events). 

In both cases you want transcripts and not opinions.

God_rules tells you that she wasn't ambushed and you seem to have no problem with accepting his opinion at face value.

Just...strange. 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10725
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
simple theist

simple theist wrote:
Vastet wrote:
Perhaps he should change that if he's so sure of himself.
I believe there is little reason for a Christian to actually come here. There hasn't been a post to made here that makes me dount my Christianity, in fact every post that is posted makes me believe Christianity even more.

That would be your problem. And has absolutely nothing to do with his so called superiority at debating.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


simple theist
Theist
Posts: 259
Joined: 2007-05-28
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: simple

jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:

wavefreak wrote:
What amazes me is that this thread has made it to four pages.

 

What amazes me is that this post has made it to four pages with Sapient still claiming Kelly was ambushed, but hasn't refuted God Rules description of the event. Which shows Kelly wasn't ambushed, and Kelly actually started talking about science.

Strange.

Sapient tells you that he thinks Kelly was ambushed.

Y#5 tells you that he heard the show and thinks that Kelly was ambushed (refuting god_rules description of events).

In both cases you want transcripts and not opinions.

God_rules tells you that she wasn't ambushed and you seem to have no problem with accepting his opinion at face value.

Just...strange.

Actually you should look at his post. It clearly says more then Kelly wasn't ambushed. Spaient and Y#5 have only declared Kellly was ambushed. God Rules provied a summary of the events that happened, which is why I"m believing him right now instead of RRS. Y#5 gave me an opinion, not a refuting of the events. I like to make my own opinions, and thats what God Rules post allowed.

If God Rules' post is so wrong, why doesn't anyone say that and mention how the events actually happened. To my knowledge God Rules did not post any opinions in his description of the event, in fact it hasn't been refuted, and therefore must be the way the event happend.

Based on that description Kelly was not ambushed, reguardless of what Sapient , Yellow #5 or anyone from RRS says.

I believe God Rules description of the events, only because they have not been refuted. 


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
So the proposal to have a

So the proposal to have a written internet debate on a neutral site is of no interest? This tends to confirm my position that Bob is interested only in "winning" and not really interested in truth. Which is precisely why an ad hoc call to his show is a fool's errand. The problem with this format is that it actually entails risk for Bob. How would he look to his constituents if some unknown internet persona dismantled his arguments? I guess he can't risk that happening. So who really lacks the courage of his convictions?


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
simple theist

simple theist wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:

wavefreak wrote:
What amazes me is that this thread has made it to four pages.

 

What amazes me is that this post has made it to four pages with Sapient still claiming Kelly was ambushed, but hasn't refuted God Rules description of the event. Which shows Kelly wasn't ambushed, and Kelly actually started talking about science.

Strange.

Sapient tells you that he thinks Kelly was ambushed.

Y#5 tells you that he heard the show and thinks that Kelly was ambushed (refuting god_rules description of events).

In both cases you want transcripts and not opinions.

God_rules tells you that she wasn't ambushed and you seem to have no problem with accepting his opinion at face value.

Just...strange.

Actually you should look at his post. It clearly says more then Kelly wasn't ambushed. Spaient and Y#5 have only declared Kellly was ambushed. God Rules provied a summary of the events that happened, which is why I"m believing him right now instead of RRS. Y#5 gave me an opinion, not a refuting of the events. I like to make my own opinions, and thats what God Rules post allowed.

If God Rules' post is so wrong, why doesn't anyone say that and mention how the events actually happened. To my knowledge God Rules did not post any opinions in his description of the event, in fact it hasn't been refuted, and therefore must be the way the event happend.

Based on that description Kelly was not ambushed, reguardless of what Sapient , Yellow #5 or anyone from RRS says.

I believe God Rules description of the events, only because they have not been refuted.

I understand.

Y#5 wrote his opinion after hearing the show. God_rules wrote Dutko and reported what he said.

So you're taking the word of someone who has an interest in slanting things to his view (his word is good solely because of his Christianity?) over someone who listened to the show?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


simple theist
Theist
Posts: 259
Joined: 2007-05-28
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: simple

jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:

wavefreak wrote:
What amazes me is that this thread has made it to four pages.

 

What amazes me is that this post has made it to four pages with Sapient still claiming Kelly was ambushed, but hasn't refuted God Rules description of the event. Which shows Kelly wasn't ambushed, and Kelly actually started talking about science.

Strange.

Sapient tells you that he thinks Kelly was ambushed.

Y#5 tells you that he heard the show and thinks that Kelly was ambushed (refuting god_rules description of events).

In both cases you want transcripts and not opinions.

God_rules tells you that she wasn't ambushed and you seem to have no problem with accepting his opinion at face value.

Just...strange.

Actually you should look at his post. It clearly says more then Kelly wasn't ambushed. Spaient and Y#5 have only declared Kellly was ambushed. God Rules provied a summary of the events that happened, which is why I"m believing him right now instead of RRS. Y#5 gave me an opinion, not a refuting of the events. I like to make my own opinions, and thats what God Rules post allowed.

If God Rules' post is so wrong, why doesn't anyone say that and mention how the events actually happened. To my knowledge God Rules did not post any opinions in his description of the event, in fact it hasn't been refuted, and therefore must be the way the event happend.

Based on that description Kelly was not ambushed, reguardless of what Sapient , Yellow #5 or anyone from RRS says.

I believe God Rules description of the events, only because they have not been refuted.

I understand.

Y#5 wrote his opinion after hearing the show. God_rules wrote Dutko and reported what he said.

So you're taking the word of someone who has an interest in slanting things to his view (his word is good solely because of his Christianity?) over someone who listened to the show?

No I am not. God_rules gave me a description of the event. Y#5 gave me his own opinion. I've asked several times for someone to refute God_rules posting of the description of the event. No one has. It is therefore that I assume his post was 100% true, becuase sapient or Y#5 did not say it wasn't, no one has. It is from that description that I have reached my own conclusion that Kelly was not ambushed. She mentioned the creation of the universe, which is scientific and not philosophical. After she mentioned the creation of the universe, Bob had the right to respond with science and to refute Kelly. If Kelly didn't want to argue science, then she should have never mentioned anything that deals with science.

I have so far taken God_rules word because he didn't simply give me an opinion. I will listen if Y#5 or anyone else wants to refute what God_rules said about the event. (though I will question why no one refuted his post before)

I don't listen to opinions without the opinion being backed up. Sapient and Y#5 haven't backed up their opinions yet. God_rules has. 

 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
simple theist

simple theist wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:

wavefreak wrote:
What amazes me is that this thread has made it to four pages.

 

What amazes me is that this post has made it to four pages with Sapient still claiming Kelly was ambushed, but hasn't refuted God Rules description of the event. Which shows Kelly wasn't ambushed, and Kelly actually started talking about science.

Strange.

Sapient tells you that he thinks Kelly was ambushed.

Y#5 tells you that he heard the show and thinks that Kelly was ambushed (refuting god_rules description of events).

In both cases you want transcripts and not opinions.

God_rules tells you that she wasn't ambushed and you seem to have no problem with accepting his opinion at face value.

Just...strange.

Actually you should look at his post. It clearly says more then Kelly wasn't ambushed. Spaient and Y#5 have only declared Kellly was ambushed. God Rules provied a summary of the events that happened, which is why I"m believing him right now instead of RRS. Y#5 gave me an opinion, not a refuting of the events. I like to make my own opinions, and thats what God Rules post allowed.

If God Rules' post is so wrong, why doesn't anyone say that and mention how the events actually happened. To my knowledge God Rules did not post any opinions in his description of the event, in fact it hasn't been refuted, and therefore must be the way the event happend.

Based on that description Kelly was not ambushed, reguardless of what Sapient , Yellow #5 or anyone from RRS says.

I believe God Rules description of the events, only because they have not been refuted.

I understand.

Y#5 wrote his opinion after hearing the show. God_rules wrote Dutko and reported what he said.

So you're taking the word of someone who has an interest in slanting things to his view (his word is good solely because of his Christianity?) over someone who listened to the show?

No I am not. God_rules gave me a description of the event. Y#5 gave me his own opinion. I've asked several times for someone to refute God_rules posting of the description of the event. No one has. It is therefore that I assume his post was 100% true, becuase sapient or Y#5 did not say it wasn't, no one has. It is from that description that I have reached my own conclusion that Kelly was not ambushed. She mentioned the creation of the universe, which is scientific and not philosophical. After she mentioned the creation of the universe, Bob had the right to respond with science and to refute Kelly. If Kelly didn't want to argue science, then she should have never mentioned anything that deals with science.

I have so far taken God_rules word because he didn't simply give me an opinion. I will listen if Y#5 or anyone else wants to refute what God_rules said about the event. (though I will question why no one refuted his post before)

I don't listen to opinions without the opinion being backed up. Sapient and Y#5 haven't backed up their opinions yet. God_rules has.

 

All the while taking Dutko's opinion as gospel simply because a brother theist told you so. 

Unless you've listened to the show that's all you or I have. 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


simple theist
Theist
Posts: 259
Joined: 2007-05-28
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: simple

jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:

wavefreak wrote:
What amazes me is that this thread has made it to four pages.

 

What amazes me is that this post has made it to four pages with Sapient still claiming Kelly was ambushed, but hasn't refuted God Rules description of the event. Which shows Kelly wasn't ambushed, and Kelly actually started talking about science.

Strange.

Sapient tells you that he thinks Kelly was ambushed.

Y#5 tells you that he heard the show and thinks that Kelly was ambushed (refuting god_rules description of events).

In both cases you want transcripts and not opinions.

God_rules tells you that she wasn't ambushed and you seem to have no problem with accepting his opinion at face value.

Just...strange.

Actually you should look at his post. It clearly says more then Kelly wasn't ambushed. Spaient and Y#5 have only declared Kellly was ambushed. God Rules provied a summary of the events that happened, which is why I"m believing him right now instead of RRS. Y#5 gave me an opinion, not a refuting of the events. I like to make my own opinions, and thats what God Rules post allowed.

If God Rules' post is so wrong, why doesn't anyone say that and mention how the events actually happened. To my knowledge God Rules did not post any opinions in his description of the event, in fact it hasn't been refuted, and therefore must be the way the event happend.

Based on that description Kelly was not ambushed, reguardless of what Sapient , Yellow #5 or anyone from RRS says.

I believe God Rules description of the events, only because they have not been refuted.

I understand.

Y#5 wrote his opinion after hearing the show. God_rules wrote Dutko and reported what he said.

So you're taking the word of someone who has an interest in slanting things to his view (his word is good solely because of his Christianity?) over someone who listened to the show?

No I am not. God_rules gave me a description of the event. Y#5 gave me his own opinion. I've asked several times for someone to refute God_rules posting of the description of the event. No one has. It is therefore that I assume his post was 100% true, becuase sapient or Y#5 did not say it wasn't, no one has. It is from that description that I have reached my own conclusion that Kelly was not ambushed. She mentioned the creation of the universe, which is scientific and not philosophical. After she mentioned the creation of the universe, Bob had the right to respond with science and to refute Kelly. If Kelly didn't want to argue science, then she should have never mentioned anything that deals with science.

I have so far taken God_rules word because he didn't simply give me an opinion. I will listen if Y#5 or anyone else wants to refute what God_rules said about the event. (though I will question why no one refuted his post before)

I don't listen to opinions without the opinion being backed up. Sapient and Y#5 haven't backed up their opinions yet. God_rules has.

 

All the while taking Dutko's opinion as gospel simply because a brother theist told you so.

Unless you've listened to the show that's all you or I have.

I actually haven't heard Dutko's opinion. I read the events, facts that were posted about how the event went. I've reached the conclusion those facts are facts and are true, because they haven't been refuted and apparently Sapient and Y#5 have seen the show and could refute the events, but haven't done so. Also Kelly herself could have refuted them. The facts (as they will be called until they are refuted) have not been refuted and are therefore facts.

If anyone disagrees with the events as posted, its their website and they could have clearly refuted them. No one has, so I consider them true.

If anyone refutes the events as posted, I'll reconsider my opinion that Kelly was not ambushed. But someone has to refute the events first. 


god rules
Theist
Posts: 49
Joined: 2007-06-26
User is offlineOffline
Already did that

wavefreak wrote:

So the proposal to have a written internet debate on a neutral site is of no interest? This tends to confirm my position that Bob is interested only in "winning" and not really interested in truth. Which is precisely why an ad hoc call to his show is a fool's errand. The problem with this format is that it actually entails risk for Bob. How would he look to his constituents if some unknown internet persona dismantled his arguments? I guess he can't risk that happening. So who really lacks the courage of his convictions?

He already dismantled kelly's arguments of science on his show with the laws of thermodynamics. Instead of making excuses why yellow #5 can't call in to bob's show, why doesn't he refute bob's claims on air in front of his audience. Speaking of his audience, there are a lot of non christians who listen and call in to his show on a regular basis. So it is not like yellow#5 would be the first to refute bob on air. If he is confident he holds the truth about the non-existence of almighty GOD then what does he have to lose? Is it pride? It's just a phone call.


god rules
Theist
Posts: 49
Joined: 2007-06-26
User is offlineOffline
Already did that

wavefreak wrote:

So the proposal to have a written internet debate on a neutral site is of no interest? This tends to confirm my position that Bob is interested only in "winning" and not really interested in truth. Which is precisely why an ad hoc call to his show is a fool's errand. The problem with this format is that it actually entails risk for Bob. How would he look to his constituents if some unknown internet persona dismantled his arguments? I guess he can't risk that happening. So who really lacks the courage of his convictions?

He already dismantled kelly's arguments of science on his show with the laws of thermodynamics. Instead of making excuses why yellow #5 can't call in to bob's show, why doesn't he refute bob's claims on air in front of his audience. Speaking of his audience, there are a lot of non christians who listen and call in to his show on a regular basis. So it is not like yellow#5 would be the first to refute bob on air. If he is confident he holds the truth about the non-existence of almighty GOD then what does he have to lose? Is it pride? It's just a phone call.


god rules
Theist
Posts: 49
Joined: 2007-06-26
User is offlineOffline
Already did that

wavefreak wrote:

So the proposal to have a written internet debate on a neutral site is of no interest? This tends to confirm my position that Bob is interested only in "winning" and not really interested in truth. Which is precisely why an ad hoc call to his show is a fool's errand. The problem with this format is that it actually entails risk for Bob. How would he look to his constituents if some unknown internet persona dismantled his arguments? I guess he can't risk that happening. So who really lacks the courage of his convictions?

He already dismantled kelly's arguments of science on his show with the laws of thermodynamics. Instead of making excuses why yellow #5 can't call in to bob's show, why doesn't he refute bob's claims on air in front of his audience. Speaking of his audience, there are a lot of non christians who listen and call in to his show on a regular basis. So it is not like yellow#5 would be the first to refute bob on air. If he is confident he holds the truth about the non-existence of almighty GOD then what does he have to lose? Is it pride? It's just a phone call.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
god rules wrote: wavefreak

god rules wrote:
wavefreak wrote:

So the proposal to have a written internet debate on a neutral site is of no interest? This tends to confirm my position that Bob is interested only in "winning" and not really interested in truth. Which is precisely why an ad hoc call to his show is a fool's errand. The problem with this format is that it actually entails risk for Bob. How would he look to his constituents if some unknown internet persona dismantled his arguments? I guess he can't risk that happening. So who really lacks the courage of his convictions?

He already dismantled kelly's arguments of science on his show with the laws of thermodynamics. Instead of making excuses why yellow #5 can't call in to bob's show, why doesn't he refute bob's claims on air in front of his audience. Speaking of his audience, there are a lot of non christians who listen and call in to his show on a regular basis. So it is not like yellow#5 would be the first to refute bob on air. If he is confident he holds the truth about the non-existence of almighty GOD then what does he have to lose? Is it pride? It's just a phone call.

 

I can't speak for yellow#5. I only can speak for myself. I won't do an on air debate as an ad hoc call in. The outcome relies too much on personality. A written exchange on a neutral site is a good way to keep the emotions low and the content value high. I'm perfectly willing to go head to head with Bob in this manner.


god rules
Theist
Posts: 49
Joined: 2007-06-26
User is offlineOffline
straight from dutko's keyboard

jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:

wavefreak wrote:
What amazes me is that this thread has made it to four pages.

 

What amazes me is that this post has made it to four pages with Sapient still claiming Kelly was ambushed, but hasn't refuted God Rules description of the event. Which shows Kelly wasn't ambushed, and Kelly actually started talking about science.

Strange.

Sapient tells you that he thinks Kelly was ambushed.

Y#5 tells you that he heard the show and thinks that Kelly was ambushed (refuting god_rules description of events).

In both cases you want transcripts and not opinions.

God_rules tells you that she wasn't ambushed and you seem to have no problem with accepting his opinion at face value.

Just...strange.

Actually you should look at his post. It clearly says more then Kelly wasn't ambushed. Spaient and Y#5 have only declared Kellly was ambushed. God Rules provied a summary of the events that happened, which is why I"m believing him right now instead of RRS. Y#5 gave me an opinion, not a refuting of the events. I like to make my own opinions, and thats what God Rules post allowed.

If God Rules' post is so wrong, why doesn't anyone say that and mention how the events actually happened. To my knowledge God Rules did not post any opinions in his description of the event, in fact it hasn't been refuted, and therefore must be the way the event happend.

Based on that description Kelly was not ambushed, reguardless of what Sapient , Yellow #5 or anyone from RRS says.

I believe God Rules description of the events, only because they have not been refuted.

I understand.

Y#5 wrote his opinion after hearing the show. God_rules wrote Dutko and reported what he said.

So you're taking the word of someone who has an interest in slanting things to his view (his word is good solely because of his Christianity?) over someone who listened to the show?

No I am not. God_rules gave me a description of the event. Y#5 gave me his own opinion. I've asked several times for someone to refute God_rules posting of the description of the event. No one has. It is therefore that I assume his post was 100% true, becuase sapient or Y#5 did not say it wasn't, no one has. It is from that description that I have reached my own conclusion that Kelly was not ambushed. She mentioned the creation of the universe, which is scientific and not philosophical. After she mentioned the creation of the universe, Bob had the right to respond with science and to refute Kelly. If Kelly didn't want to argue science, then she should have never mentioned anything that deals with science.

I have so far taken God_rules word because he didn't simply give me an opinion. I will listen if Y#5 or anyone else wants to refute what God_rules said about the event. (though I will question why no one refuted his post before)

I don't listen to opinions without the opinion being backed up. Sapient and Y#5 haven't backed up their opinions yet. God_rules has.

 

All the while taking Dutko's opinion as gospel simply because a brother theist told you so. 

Unless you've listened to the show that's all you or I have. 

That post was a response to me from dutko himself. He responded to sapients original post about the events that took place on his show with kelly. I copyied it and pasted to the post. He quoted what kelly said in the beginning of the interview. If this is false, then why hasn't kelly refuted it?


simple theist
Theist
Posts: 259
Joined: 2007-05-28
User is offlineOffline
god rules wrote: jcgadfly

god rules wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
simple theist wrote:

wavefreak wrote:
What amazes me is that this thread has made it to four pages.

 

What amazes me is that this post has made it to four pages with Sapient still claiming Kelly was ambushed, but hasn't refuted God Rules description of the event. Which shows Kelly wasn't ambushed, and Kelly actually started talking about science.

Strange.

Sapient tells you that he thinks Kelly was ambushed.

Y#5 tells you that he heard the show and thinks that Kelly was ambushed (refuting god_rules description of events).

In both cases you want transcripts and not opinions.

God_rules tells you that she wasn't ambushed and you seem to have no problem with accepting his opinion at face value.

Just...strange.

Actually you should look at his post. It clearly says more then Kelly wasn't ambushed. Spaient and Y#5 have only declared Kellly was ambushed. God Rules provied a summary of the events that happened, which is why I"m believing him right now instead of RRS. Y#5 gave me an opinion, not a refuting of the events. I like to make my own opinions, and thats what God Rules post allowed.

If God Rules' post is so wrong, why doesn't anyone say that and mention how the events actually happened. To my knowledge God Rules did not post any opinions in his description of the event, in fact it hasn't been refuted, and therefore must be the way the event happend.

Based on that description Kelly was not ambushed, reguardless of what Sapient , Yellow #5 or anyone from RRS says.

I believe God Rules description of the events, only because they have not been refuted.

I understand.

Y#5 wrote his opinion after hearing the show. God_rules wrote Dutko and reported what he said.

So you're taking the word of someone who has an interest in slanting things to his view (his word is good solely because of his Christianity?) over someone who listened to the show?

No I am not. God_rules gave me a description of the event. Y#5 gave me his own opinion. I've asked several times for someone to refute God_rules posting of the description of the event. No one has. It is therefore that I assume his post was 100% true, becuase sapient or Y#5 did not say it wasn't, no one has. It is from that description that I have reached my own conclusion that Kelly was not ambushed. She mentioned the creation of the universe, which is scientific and not philosophical. After she mentioned the creation of the universe, Bob had the right to respond with science and to refute Kelly. If Kelly didn't want to argue science, then she should have never mentioned anything that deals with science.

I have so far taken God_rules word because he didn't simply give me an opinion. I will listen if Y#5 or anyone else wants to refute what God_rules said about the event. (though I will question why no one refuted his post before)

I don't listen to opinions without the opinion being backed up. Sapient and Y#5 haven't backed up their opinions yet. God_rules has.

 

All the while taking Dutko's opinion as gospel simply because a brother theist told you so.

Unless you've listened to the show that's all you or I have.

That post was a response to me from dutko himself. He responded to sapients original post about the events that took place on his show with kelly. I copyied it and pasted to the post. He quoted what kelly said in the beginning of the interview. If this is false, then why hasn't kelly refuted it?

 I wouldn't expect a response, I've been saying that in about every post I've made on the subject. If you or Dutko lied, why hasn't anyone decided to inform me about it? Don't they care that a theist is lying to me? Oh wait, it appears the atheist are the ones trying to mislead me and that you haven't lied to me. Surely the RRS would inform me if you had lied? Right?


MrRage
Posts: 896
Joined: 2006-12-22
User is offlineOffline
simple theist, I too would

simple theist,

I too would like to know the truth about this interview Kelly had with Bob Dutko, but I'm curious about why you don't research it yourself.

Have you actually listened to, or read the official transcript of the show in question? If not, why are you 100% sure that god rules is correct without looking at any real evidence? god rules' post is second hand, without context, and circumstantial which is hardly evidence at all. Why not go to the primary source, and get a full transcript or recording of the show? Why be the first to call for a transcript, being skeptical that an atheist (on the internet) could tell the truth, but then retract that call and fall in line with a version (again on the internet) you'd like to believe? (BTW, Kelly is a more reliable source than god rules. Kelly's account is at least first hand. But I'd rather have the transcript.)

Now, I'm not arguing for Kelly, Sapient, and Y#5's version of the show. It's possible they're trying to cover up something. It's possible god rules is making up stuff, or he/she quoted the show out of context to make it look like Kelly wasn't "ambushed." This could also also be a matter of perceptions, where Dutko thought Kelly gave him full rights to bring up science when she didn't mean to give him that permission. Or, Dutko could have been trying to take advantage of Kelly's weakness in the area as alleged. Seeing this as black and white, 100% sure thing is simply preposterous on the complete lack of evidence that you have.

The proper thing to do, and you should know this, is to suspend judgement until you've read the transcript, or heard the show. Simply believing god rules' story because it hasn't been "refuted" smacks of you being too credulous and biased towards a fellow coreligionist. Your method at arriving at the conclusion that Kelly, Sapient, and Y#5 are misleading us is faulty. You may be correct, so is a broken clock twice a day. Your simple faith in god rules' post speaks volumes of why you're still a Christian, namely that either your critical thinking skills are lacking, and/or you think faith (i.e. belief without evidence) is a good way of finding truth.

So, I have decided to actually try to find this evidence myself, and hope you follow suit. There doesn't seem to be anything on WMUZ's web page about obtaining transcripts, so I have emailed Dutko asking for a transcript or recording of the show. I'll update this post when I have more data.


simple theist
Theist
Posts: 259
Joined: 2007-05-28
User is offlineOffline
MrRage wrote: simple

MrRage wrote:
simple theist, I too would like to know the truth about this interview Kelly had with Bob Dutko, but I'm curious about why you don't research it yourself. Have you actually listened to, or read the official transcript of the show in question? If not, why are you 100% sure that god rules is correct without looking at any real evidence? god rules' post is second hand, without context, and circumstantial which is hardly evidence at all. Why not go to the primary source, and get a full transcript or recording of the show? Why be the first to call for a transcript, being skeptical that an atheist (on the internet) could tell the truth, but then retract that call and fall in line with a version (again on the internet) you'd like to believe? (BTW, Kelly is a more reliable source than god rules. Kelly's account is at least first hand. But I'd rather have the transcript.) Now, I'm not arguing for Kelly, Sapient, and Y#5's version of the show. It's possible they're trying to cover up something. It's possible god rules is making up stuff, or he/she quoted the show out of context to make it look like Kelly wasn't "ambushed." This could also also be a matter of perceptions, where Dutko thought Kelly gave him full rights to bring up science when she didn't mean to give him that permission. Or, Dutko could have been trying to take advantage of Kelly's weakness in the area as alleged. Seeing this as black and white, 100% sure thing is simply preposterous on the complete lack of evidence that you have. The proper thing to do, and you should know this, is to suspend judgement until you've read the transcript, or heard the show. Simply believing god rules' story because it hasn't been "refuted" smacks of you being too credulous and biased towards a fellow coreligionist. Your method at arriving at the conclusion that Kelly, Sapient, and Y#5 are misleading us is faulty. You may be correct, so is a broken clock twice a day. Your simple faith in god rules' post speaks volumes of why you're still a Christian, namely that either your critical thinking skills are lacking, and/or you think faith (i.e. belief without evidence) is a good way of finding truth. So, I have decided to actually try to find this evidence myself, and hope you follow suit. There doesn't seem to be anything on WMUZ's web page about obtaining transcripts, so I have emailed Dutko asking for a transcript or recording of the show. I'll update this post when I have more data.

Actually Kelly hasn't posted (or did I miss it?) So all I have is Sapient and Y#5's opinion and absolutely no mention of any part of the event,from them or Kelly. So I don't have Kelly's opinion from herself or her opinion of the events on the show. From my understanding, God_rules' post was a direct quote from Bob. I haven't even heard a quote from Kelly. I have no faith in God_rules, I simply believe that his post hasn't been refuted, because it is true, otherwise I would assume Sapient would have said it was a lie, especially when he likes to insult people all the time and has such a low opinion of Bob anyways, why not expose him or at least God_rules as a lier?

I searched the shows website, and found no transcipt or ability to listen to the show.

 1st, if Kellly does post I have no way to prove it was actuallly her that made the post and not Sapient, however if she does post, I won't bring the fact it could be Sapient and thus not a first hand account.

So...All Kelly has to do is make a post that says "I was Ambushed and here is the real order of events" (and then list them). I would then search for Bob's e-mail address and demand a transcript. I would even except Sapient posting this is what kelly said.

 

 


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7530
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
god rules wrote: If this is

god rules wrote:
If this is false, then why hasn't kelly refuted it?

I'm gonna go with the "just doesn't care enough." We'll probably touch on this in the stickam room/on the show at somepoint.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
   All this bickering

 

 All this bickering about Kelly said this andBob said that is really tedious. Even a bit juvinile.

Here is a REAL CHALLENGE 

 

I created a myspace page. I'll give Bob the password so he can have equal access. We can debate on that page. 

http://www.myspace.com/bobdutko_vs_wavefreak

 

Rules of engagement to be determined.  I am open to another venue.

 

Cut the chatter. Make it real or buzz off. 


god rules
Theist
Posts: 49
Joined: 2007-06-26
User is offlineOffline
IN OTHER WORDS

Sapient wrote:

god rules wrote:
If this is false, then why hasn't kelly refuted it?

I'm gonna go with the "just doesn't care enough." We'll probably touch on this in the stickam room/on the show at somepoint.

In other words, can't refute it because its true. Just another way of avoiding the reality of what happened on the show, just like when you moved the thread to trollville hoping that it would be ignored or forgotten. Once again, out of sight out of mind phylosophy.


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
god rules wrote: Sapient

god rules wrote:
Sapient wrote:

god rules wrote:
If this is false, then why hasn't kelly refuted it?

I'm gonna go with the "just doesn't care enough." We'll probably touch on this in the stickam room/on the show at somepoint.

In other words, can't refute it because its true. Just another way of avoiding the reality of what happened on the show, just like when you moved the thread to trollville hoping that it would be ignored or forgotten. Once again, out of sight out of mind phylosophy.

You're kind of a jackass, only without the "kind of."


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
When's the last time someone

When's the last time someone got the asshat avatar by the way?


MrRage
Posts: 896
Joined: 2006-12-22
User is offlineOffline
You completely missed the

You completely missed the point of my post, simple theist. Sigh. Anyway, I emailed Dutko and he said that the station doesn't do transcripts or offer recordings.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Let me see if I've got this

Let me see if I've got this so far...

 We have Y#5's opinion.

We have god_rules opinion.

We have Dutko's opinion (which god_rules believes has special merit because it came from dutko's own keyboard).

We have no way to get proof because no one that I know of has transcripts or a way to actually hear the show.

But...

We have simple theist validating god_rules and Dutko as the unvarnished truth for no other reason than they share a religion.

Am I missing something? 

 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: Am I

jcgadfly wrote:

Am I missing something?

 

You are now. Particpation in this thread has caused loss of mass in your cerebral cortex. 


simple theist
Theist
Posts: 259
Joined: 2007-05-28
User is offlineOffline
MrRage wrote: You

MrRage wrote:
You completely missed the point of my post, simple theist. Sigh. Anyway, I emailed Dutko and he said that the station doesn't do transcripts or offer recordings.
Honestly i got your point even if my post didn't reflect that I did.