• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Verbal Beat-downs

GoodKat

New Member
arg-fallbackName="GoodKat"/>
Post any short debates in which you quickly crushed you opponent's position(before they delete their embarrassing comments).
 
arg-fallbackName="irmerk"/>
I would certainly like to be confident enough to post a few, but the people I always end up talking to or debating refuse to acknowledge what I say, or other people sharing my opinion say, at all and leave the conversation or discussion just as if not more dogmatically confident of their position. So, that being said, I just so happen to have a log of a conversation I had via Facebook chat about the bible and how she dislikes my pompous swagger. Oh, it should be noted that she is a die hard religious fucktard, and that I used to be semi-friends with her and just love to fuck with her as much as possible nowadays. I will cut out the beginning of the conversation, because it was just ... well, irrelevant. I know it is a little bit long, but I take great pride in this one, especially since it is one of the few, if not the only, I have documented and saved.

irmerk: Ahem, redbox sucks.

Her: no it does not. i love it

irmerk: Wait... Did you just offer the fact that you love it as evidence to it not sucking?

Her: i sure did.

Wowza! ... You should watch "Religulous" or "The God That Wasn't There." Good movies.

Her: why?

irmerk: Or just read my blog... Hahaha, because they are more informative than the Bible.

Her: have you actually read the bible?

irmerk: Hell no... Why would I have time for a fairy tale? Have you read the Wheel of Time?

Her: then how do you know that your blogs are more informative?

irmerk: Uhhh, I just explained that in a phrase.

Her: because you think its a fairy tale? well a lot of people don't see it as that

irmerk: Blog: References, peer review, non-dogmatic, etc. Bible: Myth, uncredited, fiction. It's not a question of, "I don't see it that way." It's just another book. It's fiction and has no cross references for validity. This is besides the point of it being written by numerous people for the past two thousand years over endless translations and interpretations. Jordan: 1, Bible: 0.

Her: no.

irmerk: Oh... Why not?

Her: What gives you the right to put it down when you don't know much about it?

irmerk: Okay... I know this might be a very hard concept for you to grasp... The onus is upon those who make a claim. you made the claim that the Bible is of substantial worth and not just a fairy-tale. I humored you by shooting you down. A claim without proof can be dismissed without proof. I mean... That would be like saying you have to know a lot, or everything, about... sayyy... Mother Goose to be able to 'put it down.' By the way, 'put it down' is just a sneaky-ass way of trying to put whoever you say it to into the mindset that it actually was UP. As if it ever DID have validity. Maybe I can explain it better... Your whole premise resides on the basis of the Bible being, or once being, valid and that I'm trying to disprove it. To the contrary, it is not, and has never been. People, like you, have been trying to prove otherwise for less than two millinea. So, that's what I mean by the onus is upon you. Wait! More than two... Oopsie.

Her: Think what you want, but I am going to believe what the bible says. You don't need to shove it in my face that you don't believe it. Im done arguing with you about this.

irmerk: Whoa, try to settle down. I'm not shoving my belief in your face. I'm shoving reality into your face, if I were to be shoving anything. Of course, you, and anyone else, can believe whatever you want.

Her: you have no proof that the bible isn't true

irmerk: Don't try to say it's rational, real, right or logical, though. I just told you, I don't have to. Burden of proof is on the one making the claim: You. Now, I do have the connotative form of proof, which is complete and utter annihilation of your claim by forms of rebuttal.

Her: which is what?

irmerk: I already said some of it, were you not reading?

Her: i was. refresh my memory

irmerk: It's just another book. It's fiction and has no cross references for validity. This is besides the point of it being written by numerous people for the past two thousand years over endless translations and interpretations.

Her: whatever. im done talking about this.

irmerk: :O:O I think I love that more and more every time I witness it: The clamping shut of eyes and ears by religious people when confronted with the reality of the matter.

Her: or we're just sick of listening to you...

irmerk: Uhh, that's exactly what I said.

Her: because you think you know everything about everything. it kinda gets old.

irmerk: The question is why those people would be sick of listening? If they are right, there would be no problem proving it. If they are wrong, they can either give up and accept reality or refuse to. The easiest way seems to be refusing to listen and retreating. Well, prove me wrong. That's the beauty of people like me, we actually DO know everything about everything. It's kind of like science; not dogmatic. Everything IS correct unless proven otherwise - that's when we change our minds and stances to keep up with reality. Contrary to most religious people which are dogmatic - they refuse to change stances in light of contradictory evidence. This leaves them frustrated by those trying to enlighten the evidence upon them - making them sick of it. Being sick of it and refusing to continue conversation or listening in no way makes you right or allows you to remain right. You do so because you're frustrated with being proven wrong and refusing to change. You're somehow not realizing that you are frustrated with your own inadequacies. So don't try and paint me, and people like me, being right all of the time for a REASON as a bad thing.

Her: like i said. believe what you want

irmerk: Like I said, it's in no way a question of belief. You are wrong, and that's the point. If you think otherwise, you have to prove it, not just say "Believe what you want!"

Her: i am not wrong. you can't tell me that a belief is wrong. its called FAITH

irmerk: That does nothing but hurt your credibility unless you deal with others as close minded as you: Thus the problem with the Bible belt and religion in the first place.

Her: im done talking to yo. bye

irmerk: Hahaha, okay. I think I have faith that you're a man, and a unicorn made you that way. Wait.. You realize you failed, right? That I won? Faith STILL doesn't make you right... It actually makes you ABSOLUTELY wrong... :/:/ Just in case you actually are reading what else I'm saying, let me put your faith making you wrong into perspective: Other peoples faith is wrong to you because you do not have the same faith. If it were right, you would have faith in it. This idea is obviously reciprocal and thus makes your faith, indeed, wrong.

Her: i don't know what you don't understand by me saying that i'm not talking to you anymore...

irmerk: I said, "Just in case you actually are reading..."

Her: i wasn't

irmerk: Oh, okay, well that's why I said that in the first place.

Her: i just mean quit writing to me

irmerk: But if you care to, I cleared it up for you.

Her: i don't care to.

irmerk: Oh, I couldn't deduce that. Just trying to help your conscience for later... So if you ever think back on this you can remember that he cleared it up for you. :D:D Should I pray that you see the light?

Her: i won't be thinking about it. no....you don't need to do that. BYE

irmerk: Do you not understand the concept of the word "if"? Wow... Just read for once, and you don't have to respond with dumb shit.

Her: Do you not understand the concept of the word "bye"?

irmerk: Apparently you don't... You didn't leave, it seems. Hahaha!

Her: cause you won't leave me alone!

irmerk: Man, I love completely destroying everything you try to say.

I like how she would off and on turn on the 'professional spelling' switch to try and, you know, puff up her chest. I also like how... well... the whole, "Well, you can't prove the Bible WRONG! Ha! Check and mate!" argument was used, as usual. Snore.

I guess I am kind of malicious... :(
 
arg-fallbackName="GoodKat"/>
I just finished one on Youtube with "muchtribulation", I replied to a comment he posted on a video.
him said:
According to you and those like you, the ultimate ancestry has everything to do with 'The Big Bang'.
For your information, "God did it" is True and seems wiser than.".We are working on Abiogenesis and are close to a Theory but not yet. As to before TBB, don't know yet".Saying 'we don't know' maybe fine for you but it is not fine for those seeking Truth.
me said:
Actually realizing that you don't know is the first step on the path to truth. If you just guess and assume that you are right, then you will probably never find out what really happened. I'm sorry that you are too prideful to admit that you really don't know.
him said:
You and those like you "really don't know"..you have admitted so.
It is not pride which restrains me from stating, I don't know..it is Truthfulness...for if I would state that I didn't know, I would be a liar.
me said:
Bear in mind, there is a difference between knowledge and belief, even if you are 100% convinced that you are right, that does not turn belief into knowledge. I suppose if you really do know that your conclusion is correct, then you could easily supply me with the unambiguous, objective evidence that lead to it. I would love to see it, you see, I am well aware that my beliefs could be wrong, and am willing to change the if given a rational, convincing reason.
him said:
It is also good to bear in mind that knowledge and belief are inseperable
It is only the God which you don't believe exists, that could easily supply you with the unambiguous and objective evidence.
Seek and you shall find.
me said:
It is honestly impossible for me to "seek" God as long as I don't believe in Him, and due to the rigorous way in which I critique my own ideas, it is impossible for me to believe that He exists without unambiguous objective evidence. Imagine trying to sincerely ask a spirit from another religion to appear to you.
If God has given you objective evidence, then you can easily pass it on to me. That's what "objective" means. Now show me your evidence, or admit that you really don't know.
him said:
Since God, by Jesus Christ, has revealed His Truth to me, not you nor anyone else can ever give me any ultimatum.
If God grants it, I will not hesitate to relay this that you enquire of.
There is only one True Religion.
me said:
Until you provide me with such evidence, your assertion that there is only one true religion is bare. Knowledge may only be arrived at through logical reasoning and investigation, not by "feelings" or epiphanies, and certainly not by faith. If you have no objective unambiguous evidence to support your position, then by definition you do not know, and to claim that you do is to bear false witness.
him said:
Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.
me said:
That's all? Even if it is, you still have yet to provide evidence.
him said:
What was the evidence of impending death in the cases where young, pefectly healty individuals suddenly dropped dead.
me said:
Red herring logical fallacy. Evidence is required for one to know something, not for it to be true. I am not attacking the existence of your God, I am attacking your claim to know that He exists. If you do not have unambiguous objective evidence for His existence then you do not know, regardless of whether or not He truly exists, just like no one knows when someone is going to suddenly die of a brain aneurysm. Quit changing the subject and address my points, or concede.
him said:
Although worded diferrent.Ultimatum remains Denied.
me said:
So you're going to continue ignoring my points and claiming to be right? How ignorant. You do realize that you will never convince me that way? You will never convince anyone of anything besides your own arrogance, dishonesty, and delusion that way. I suppose then you will fail at your primary mission of conversion.
him said:
What's wrong with you?
I stated to you that ultimatums given are useless.
How arrogant of you to continue.
me said:
Behind each of my ultimatums are logical arguments. Most would see this, but apparently you cannot, my mistake apparently was not arrogance, but overestimation of your cognitive abilities. I will lay out the arguments in the most easily comprehensible manner I can.
"Now show me your evidence, or admit that you really don't know. "
-You must have objective unambiguous evidence to know that God exists, if the evidence is objective, then it should be easy to relay it to me. If you do not, then either 1)You know that God exists and have the evidence, but do not want me to know, or 2)You have no evidence and thus do not know, and are being dishonest by claiming that you do.
"Quit changing the subject and address my points, or concede."
-I have made several points against your posts, if you are right then it should be easy for you to address them. If however you continue to change the subject whenever I make a point, then either 1) You are right, but do not care about convincing me, or 2) You are wrong and unable to counter my points.
him said:
Whatever motivates your ultimatums,They remain Denied.
You have elivated yourself to, the height of arrogance.
me said:
I have lain out my arguments, if you do not address them, you lose.
him said:
You are incorrigible.
me said:
Continue to heap you baseless insults on me, it only makes you position look more desperate.
him said:
You are behaving as a spoiled brat.
No ultimatums mean none,nihil habet.
me said:
Good, more insults! Did you even look at my arguments?

He then quits responding, I guess my soul wasn't worth the trouble :D
 
arg-fallbackName="irmerk"/>
GoodKat said:
Did you even look at my arguments?
Maybe he thought this was another ultimatum (He used that word a lot and seemed to base a lot off of it, maybe he just learned what it meant and got a boner about it and just had to sound smart to someone) and got so gosh darn frustrated with an agent of the devil!
He said:
If God grants it, I will not hesitate to relay this that you enquire of.
Why did you not take this opportunity to offer the chance that you were an agent of God telling him he should relay this? Haha...
 
arg-fallbackName="nasher168"/>
Ok, this debate was played out entirely in the comments section of "An Atheist Meets God" by EdwardCurrent.
It is me (drunk168), patduckles (patduckles) and another user who we are friends with called nolan30000 debating someone called peefinster.
At the time, me patduckles and Nolan30000 were all talking to each other via Skype. At first it was just Nolan, but then he got out of his depth and requested assistance, which is where we came in.
There was also someone called bunnyman456 who came in at the end on our side, but nolan30000 just flirted with him.
(note: nolan probably did a lot more harm than good in this debate)

PeeFinster:
Because we have a spine copied from a "fish" (btw God created man first) thats why Evolution exists..
God made man and animals and use the same basic foot print when it comes to skeletal and organs. What was he suppose to use in a "fish" for a spine? or make a spineless fish like Atheists..lol

nolan30000:
who or what created God?
some say he created himself, if he created himself what did he use?
and how?

PeeFinster:
O.k. we dont know the answer to either of those questions...so wouldnt it be "safer" to go with the God theory?
Look its like playin lotto ...you play the numbers and if you pick the right numbers you get the prize in the end.

nolan30000:
hehe u just called it a theory
but getting on no
because of the number of really extreme things that people have done in the name of god
people who blow themselves up
or start christian suicide cults
or blank people for not going for god

PeeFinster:
I called it a God "Theory" because thats what YOU knuckleheads call it. duh.

Stop using excuses for not believing God exists...People, Religious or not commit all kinds of horrible things on earth...thats why its called SIN...dont you get it?
Thats what I mean when I say Athiests dont have common sense.

nolan30000:
erm for you its called sin
for us its called bad morality
but yeah i dont really get what you are saying
because you are saying that atheists dont have common sense
but if u hear that there is an all powerfull being that created us and sent down his son he walked on water and turned water into wine before dieing and then rising from the dead
your common sense will tell you that is not true
not that we should all follow this book which must of been written by god because that man said so

drunk168: (this is where I came in!)
I would call God a hypothesis, as it has not actually been proved.
"Stop using excuses for not believing God exists"
We don't need excuses, we look at all the evidence available and make a descision based on that. We rely on our common sense to come to atheism as a conclusion.
"People, Religious or not commit all kinds of horrible things"
So you agree that religion has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with morality. Good, that'll save me time later.

PeeFinster:
Jesus and the Bible are the truth just because of his resurrection. There were even eye witness accounts to this event.
All the other religions (muslim)are not correct ...Allah is just a rotting corpse nothing more...he never rose from the dead.
I mentioned previously God is the Boss you dont like it he can do with you as he pleases...face it, he has FULL authority over you, period!

drunk168:
Cite your source. Give us an eyewitness account from the time that isn't the bible.
The reason i don't take the bible as evidence is because it is a biased account and to use it as evidence would be circular reasoning.
"All the other religions (muslim)are not correct"
Agreed.
"Allah is just a rotting corpse nothing more...he never rose from the dead"
Islam believes that Allah is the same God as yours. To say that allah is a rotting corpse is to say that your god is too.

patduckles:
how can "he" have controll over me i states in his book that he wrote that he gave man free will, so, therefore, he cannto do with me as he pleases.

PeeFinster:
See this is the common sense issue once again...
its simple..Jesus said you have "free will" here on Earth (to believe in him, what pants you will put on) but in the end its his FINAL say by the decision you made regarding your belief in him.... He's the BOSS!

drunk168:
That's basically saying:
"you can do what ever you want...as long as you do EXACTLY AS I TELL YOU"
Not free will in my book.

patduckles:
how can some one claim to be omnipotent if he controlls all and lets me suffer for eternity for not beliving in him if he wants my belife he must give non circular proof

bunnyman456:
okay, this is funny to a point, until you started writing you own dialogue to God. Don't you get this sneaking suspicion in the back of your head that you're not doing this for anyone except for yourself? Do you get sneaking suspicions that maybe you're sacrificing actual research for an immediate laugh or acknowledgement of your brilliance? What the hell?

nolan30000:
wow ur name makes me soo hot
id love to give your tail a good honking

drunk168 and patduckles (over Skype):
Shut up Nolan!
 
arg-fallbackName="patduckles"/>
this is just a side note for the debate above, i tend to type fast so i make errors when typing so i wish to apologise for any problems these mistakes may cause.
 
Back
Top