You guys will never guess what I got in my Inbox
Posted on: June 1, 2007 - 11:02pm
Offline
You guys will never guess what I got in my Inbox
| Frank Walton <[email protected]> |
|
| so when do you want to debate? I suggest we have a formal debate done at theologyweb.com. I suggest this format: Opening statements: no more than 1500 words. First Rebuttals: no more than 1000 words. Second Rebuttals: no more than 800 words. Conclusions: no more than 600 words. The duration of the debate will be 10 days. Using your opponents words in your statements and rebuttals and conclusion counts in your word count. No excessively quoting a source. No plagiarism. No ad hominems. Linking is okay so long as you don't use it as an argument (for instance, "checkout this link that deals with everything my opponent says", etc.). Agreed? I'd be more than happy to change anything here if you like. Theologyweb.com are quite strict with the rules of conduct which is good. So, I suggest we go there. Several minutes later I got:
I do not believe you to be capable of the kind of debate that I would consider formal, rational, or adult like. After viewing past debates that you have taken part in, I can only conclude that any kind of discourse that I engage you in will quickly dissolve into ad hominem attacks(much like the anonymous comments you've been leaving on my blog), and you claiming victory regardless of any real outcome. Judging by your past debates, you'll likely use the same tired arguments, alluding to such nonsense as the uniformity of nature as some sort of proof for a divine creator. This scenario is merely setting up a false dichotomy in the sense that you're assuming that whatever cannot be explained must be attributed to a creator. Besides, this is a stupid argument in the first place because you're assuming that nature needs 'something' to 'keep' it uniform. Why do you think that there is a need to 'keep nature uniform' when it has never been anything but? Furthermore, if you're going to introduce the possibility of the supernatural, you cannot simply stop at god, you have to allow for endless possibilities. You can no more prove empirically that your god is keeping nature uniform than you could disprove the idea that a giant head of lettuce is doing so. Your claim is unfalsifiable and therefore worthless. I've already said everything that I wanted to say to or about you in the post that you referenced. And yes Frank, you're correct, I don't take you seriously at all. Between reading your blog posts that are merely thinly veiled ad hominem attacks, your arguments that could have been copied and pasted from any apologetics website and these two emails that you have sent me, I cannot find anything that I believe warrants my serious consideration. I know that you'll attempt to turn this around and make it seem like I'm afraid of you, or too cowardly to debate you. Therefore, I offer you counter-challenge. You want to debate me? Why don't you start by refuting the comment that I had posted on your blog that you shamefully deleted a week later after you couldn't refute it. I'm sure you've deleted it permanently, so I've enclosed it as an attachment. Until you can finish the debate that you slinked away from, I see no reason to engage in a new one. -Meagan So.....should I debate him, or is it as pointless as I envision it being?Input, please,  |
- Login to post comments
Walk, nay, run from this. Let him debate here. Why should he fear this forum? Bring him to our (well, really your, I'm just a guest) Circus Maximus.
Edit: Parens
"Tis better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven." -Lucifer
I can't wait until I see what he has to say.
Who was the person that he said challenged him to a debate?
As we can see on Frank's blog, HE is challenging people (Flemming).
You should debate and expose him. I already what he is going to do.
1. Quote an evolutionist.
2. Say that atheists are delusional for "believing" that something can come out of nothing.
3. He will also say that atheists use "nature of the gaps".
Typical Frank stuff. Go get him, Meagan.
Atheist Books
Frank is not allowed here. And besides, he will link to his blog.
Atheist Books
I see. My apologies.
"Tis better to rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven." -Lucifer
It's cool.
Hey Meagan, where did he send you this message?
Atheist Books
Lmao, got my reply already:
Goodbye, Meagan. You truly are a coward. Just remember, you challenged me to a debate, I accepted, now you're running.
I'll see if Ben is man enough to debate then.
http://atheismisrational.blogspot.com/
TWebber familiar with Walton here.
Last I checked he was banned from TWeb, though it might have been temporary. In any case, he's a nutcase. Let me put that a bit more compassionately. The guy has some serious personal issues he needs to resolve, and feeding his frenzy would be counterproductive to his health.
You'll be doing no one a favor by agreeing. Turn him down as gently as you can. If it weren't for his evident hatred of all things atheist, I'd feel kind of sorry for him.
There is no lao tzu
Et tu, Brute?
In an effort to not clog our boards with Frank crap, you guys can read the continued exchanged here if you're interested.
http://atheismisrational.blogspot.com/
You should tell Frank that RRS Jr's comments break the rules, yet he approves them. Oh, that's right. Because those are HIS comments.
Frank is such a moron.
Atheist Books
That's why I won't debate him.
It'll accomplish nothing.
Even if I schooled him, hell even if someone like ToddAngst or DeludedGod put him in his place, Walton would just call them fags and claim vistory for himself anyway.
http://atheismisrational.blogspot.com/
I thought I was going to find out you were the proud mother of a bouncing baby death threat.
FYI - I'm the one who has challenged him to a debate. I will be making it clear and undeniable in my opening statements that any attempt at an ad hominem attack on myself will be considered a forfeit of the debate. I will of course give him the option to back out gracefully at that point or continue with honor.
I challenged him because of his claims that Flemming wouldn't debate him. I'm quite sure I know why he wouldnt' (the guy really does seem to be unstable), but I could be wrong and perhaps if the rules are laid out clearly and with consequence of forefit, he may abide by an order of conduct suitable of a mature debate among adults.
By the way, he accepted the challenge on his blog and asked me to send him an email, I did. It's been over 24 hours and I also confirmed on his blog as well, several hours ago, yet nothing in my inbox...
"All it would take to kill God is one meteorite a half mile across - think about why." - Vorax
Visit my blog on Atheism: Cerebral Thinking for some more food for intelligent thought.
Guys, he devoted a whole post on his blog to me.
Does that mean I'm an official part of the RRS now?
This is hilarious.
http://atheismisrational.blogspot.com/
Frank wrote a blog about you Meagan.
He's a moron. Did he ever tell you why your comment broke the rules?
Atheist Books
AA, you gotta do an atheism sucks sucks post about it, pwease?
<3 <3 <3
All he did was post our email exchange, which doesn't bother me in the slightest.
Honestly, read it, the whole thing makes him look retarded.
http://atheismisrational.blogspot.com/
Let me get this straight.
Frank said that you guys should have a new debate because he said he let you have the last word?
Yet, he won't tell you why you broke the rules?
Atheist Books
We should have a new debate because although he deleted my comment and never refuted it, I got the last word somehow by posting it on my blog(which I never did).
Logic-tastic.
http://atheismisrational.blogspot.com/
Frank Walton is an attention whore. For some reason he thinks he deserves our notice just because he brags about how smart he is (he's too dumb to realize how moronic he is). He'll never present anything intelligent because, for example, he thinks Gene Cook is an intelligent debater.
I wouldn't be surprised that he e-mails people on this forum on a daily basis then declares victory when the Atheist doesn't want to waste his/her time on such a moron.
So, should we write the blog like this...
Blog title: Meagan vs Frank
"I think they should have a new debate because although Frank deleted Meagan's comment and never refuted it, she got the last word somehow by posting it on her blog(which she never did).
And what rule did Meagan's comment break? Well, we don't know because Frank won't tell us.
Frank, you make perfect sense..."
Feel free to add to it, if you want, Meagan.
Atheist Books
Aa, check out my blog, I put up a whole new post, should explain things pretty clearly, feel free to link to it or use it or whatever.
I would also add that he allows comments that 'break the rules' all the time, like his sock puppet accounts and pretty much every comment on the Mr. Constantine post.
Edit: I especially like the comment he left on his post about me, lmao
http://atheismisrational.blogspot.com/
The one from the anonymous poster?
Atheist Books
Anonymous=Frank 99.9% of the time,
I would never make my own sock puppets. That's just gross.
RRS, Jr., Daddy Cool, Anonymous= they're all Frank. In fact, none of them have pictures, just like...*gasp* Frank!
Frank is mentally sick.
Well, I hope he finally tells you why you broke the rules, homie. That boy needs to grow up.
Hmm, I wonder how Frank will react when he finds out that I'm moving close to his house this summer.
Atheist Books
He posted a comment on your blog.
No, you shouldn't. Would you have debated Terri Schiavo on the benefits of Nuclear power versus coal? Silly debate right? Frank isn't capable of debate. Did you see he got kicked from the theist forum in his last debate? The owner told him something about being a disgrace to Christianity.
Aside from the fact that your insulting your intellect, and wasting your valuable time on him, you're also fueling his passion. His faith is weak so to prop it up he needs to attack atheists. Fortunately for him, he gets just as high off of your lack of responses as he does to your responses. The inevitable "x person chickened out because they didn't write my whiny arrogant ass back" brings him joy, but I'd wager it's slightly less joy than when he has someone validate his delusional worldview by engaging him in a formal debate.
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.
I still think Meagan would've kicked Frank's butt.
You already were part of the RRS.
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.
Get ready for a wild and zany ride. Enjoy. I'd love to hear how he fucks this one up.
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.
Vorax, just beware of Frank's sock puppet account known as RRS, Jr.
Thanks for the tips guys. I'm sure this will be interesting.
Maragon - It's up to you if you do or not, from what I now know about his debating I'm asking my self if it was worth my time and now I'm going to have to come up with two rock solid points, one about the debate and some legalize for rules regarding ad hominem attacks. If you want to debate him first, let me know and I'll give him an easy way to debate you first.
"All it would take to kill God is one meteorite a half mile across - think about why." - Vorax
Visit my blog on Atheism: Cerebral Thinking for some more food for intelligent thought.
I think most debate vs theists is just that, pointless and this guy appears to fall into the extreme end of that.
I do enjoy the open and candor dialog that some people have but debate format doesn't work because they will never be able to show evidence or facts.
I agree Tarpon, I did ask for the debate to have an nformal format, but it will be his call. I feel informal debating covers more information more quickly...there's nothing worse then reading through a page of text in a formal debate when the first point can be torn apart and the rest of it hinges on the first point...makes for long and dull reading.
"All it would take to kill God is one meteorite a half mile across - think about why." - Vorax
Visit my blog on Atheism: Cerebral Thinking for some more food for intelligent thought.
Nope, you can go ahead Vorax, I don't want to debate him.
He's a waste of my time.
Maragon, Can I just say I admire your character in refusing to debate that nut?
I am continually impressed by the level of intellect from many people on these boards, but now I'm equally impressed with the resolve you exhibit Maragon. I personally can not back down even when it's painfully obvious I should.
Ok, done kissing ass now.
I suck at signatures.
While I do apprceiate the compliments Cass, I must admit that not debating Walton took no resolve whatsoever.
Here's the thing about Frank; he's crazy. And I don't mean that as anything less than literal - the guy has some serious mental and emotional issues. Frank's faith in his own god is so weak that he feels the need to attack Atheists to bolster it(as Sapient mentioned). If I were to debate Walton, it would only lend to his mistaken impression that his ideas are valid, intelligent, and a threat to atheism.
Frank doesn't deserve or need any validation, and a formal debate will only serve to bolster his ego.
http://atheismisrational.blogspot.com/
He's a dumbass and a troll. From what I remember he barely lasted a day here.