Ted's PalTalk Debate Challenge

[TLN]

Completely disgusted with the “conversational skills” of many posters here, I’m reiterating my PalTalk debate invitation.

Why PalTalk? Because it’s much more difficult to evade direct questions and be rude with an audible conversation. In a forum thread, some of our more evasive posters can cherry pick the questions they want to address and ignore the rest, all the while maintaining the appearance of participation. On PalTalk, it’s much easier to keep people on track.

A few posters here seem to need special help with maintaining focus and answering direct questions. For starters, but not limited to, Clancie, “Interesting” Ian, and Lucianarchy.

So, feel free to look me up on PalTalk. If I’m not in the “Room For Skeptics” there’s usually someone there who can contact me via the phone or email. Or, feel free to schedule a debate here in this thread and I’ll do my best to accommodate you. Ian scheduled three times, canceled three times, then couldn’t understand why I couldn’t participate when I happened to run into him by chance on a night I had company incoming. Here’s your chance Ian: when would you like to chat?

Of course, I don’t actually expect any of the above posters to engage in a conversation in a venue where they cannot evade direct questions. This thread will probably simply be a memorial designed to call attention to the fact that genuine conversation or the exploration of their belief systems is not what these posters are after; they're here to shout at us their belief systems, make themselves feel open-minded, declare victory, then run away.

Or, maybe they really are open-minded. Well, I’m ready when you are…

 

[TLN]

No takers. Surprise, Surprise.

What are you three afraid of? Oh, right...

 

[thaiboxerken]

Believers tend not to really debate, as they have no evidence to support their positions.

 

[TLN]

Believers tend not to really debate, as they have no evidence to support their positions.

Which is fine, but the above three all argue that they do have evidence. Then you ask for it...

 

[thaiboxerken]

Ian has been on Paltalk a few times, but he's usually drunk. He rambles on and on with his nonsense, even when he's sober. There is no debating Ian either, because his "evidence" tends to be questions about perception of the reality and other such nonsense. He basically turns all paranormal discussion into a metaphysical philosophy discussion where evidence plays no part.

They have no evidence for their beliefs.

 

[CFLarsen]

TLN,

I appreciate your effort. It simply goes to show just how deep the intellectual dishonesty runs with these people.

In a way, forums like this is a perfect platform for them to advocate their beliefs, without ever having to really examine the beliefs themselves.

I doubt that you could even get them to meet you face to face. It seems they hate having to face real-world skeptics.

You've invited Clancie to lunch, but she turned you down. Karen Boesen refuses to speak in public, if there are skeptics in the audience. Lucianarchy hides in his rathole, and only comes out when he thinks everyone has forgotten about his deceit. Steve is...well, you'll all know in time what he is up to. Ian is just..well, immaterial.

Skeptics seem to be feared for wanting to find the truth. People with something to hide always fears the candle in the dark.

 

[Interesting Ian]

If anyone wants to discuss anything with me they can do it on here.

 

[scribble]

If anyone wants to discuss anything with me they can do it on here.

Edited to add:

When by posting that you make it PERFECTLY CLEAR you either did not read or did not understand the first post in this thread, you also make it PERFECTLY CLEAR that that is a flat-out lie. You can't very well have a conversation with someone who is either too ignorant to understand a word you say or too set on what he's thinking to actually pay attention.

 

[TLN]

If anyone wants to discuss anything with me they can do it on here.

But apparently, they can't. You claim no one has ever refuted your arguments. They have. You claim reasonable, intelligent people are "stupid" simply because they disagree with you.

Further, you agreed to this debate at least twice. Now you don't want to participate?

Ian, stop hiding and start scheduling. I suggest a Saturday because of the time zone difference.

 

[Clancie]

Posted by TLN

Of course, I don’t actually expect any of the above posters to engage in a conversation in a venue where they cannot evade direct questions.

This thread will probably simply be a memorial designed to call attention to the fact that genuine conversation or the exploration of their belief systems is not what these posters are after; they're here to shout at us their belief systems, make themselves feel open-minded, declare victory, then run away.

...No takers. Surprise, Surprise.

Indeed.

Perhaps you should start considering alternate explanations?

 

[CFLarsen]

I'm afraid Clancie is too busy opening new threads with old subjects.

Her arrogance is only surpassed by her intellectual dishonesty. I sincerely hope that the O forum will disallow this kind of behavior. This has nothing to do with critical thinking. It is the exact opposite.

Perhaps you should start considering alternate explanations?

Like what? You refuse to address questions because you complain people are rude. Then, when they are not, you simply ignore them.

What will it take for you to answer the questions?

 

[TLN]

Indeed.

Perhaps you should start considering alternate explanations?

I have: I'm a big ol' meanie who's abusive to you. Fine.

Come to PalTalk and as soon as I start up, you can hit the little X in the upper right hand corner of the window. Problem solved. You can also enjoy the satisfaction of coming back here to post "I told you so."

Clancie, I've been very nice to you on many, many occasions. I did not bust out of the gate spewing bile and hate. But you really try a person's patience.

There are many thoughtful and polite responses in the Jordan thread and many others that you simply ignore. When people try to press the point, you cry "abuse" and run. You're not engaging in "discussion" you're making speeches and you don't want feedback on them. This is why I'm insisting on vocal communication: you can't seem to follow text.

Be open-minded. Give it a shot. If you're right and I'm an ass at least you'll know it once and for all. Or, like in the Summarizing thread, you can claim you know the future, that we won't get anywhere, and quit before the attempt.

 

[scribble]

I'd volunteer to go one step further and kick you if you get abusive.

But you get a little excited sometimes.

 

[TLN]

I'd volunteer to go one step further and kick you if you get abusive.

But you get a little excited sometimes.

Oh, agreed! Italian guys from New York do that from time to time.

Frankly, I'd insist on not being the room administrator during this debate.

Scribble, have you ever watched the Psychic and Paranormal Debate Room in action? How would you characterize my behavior towards the believers I debate? Am I abusive? Do I call them names?

If anyone else has witnessed the P&P Debate Room in action, feel free to recount your experiences here, good or bad.

 

[Millionframe]

Put up or shut up -- I think Randi said it best.

 

[Interesting Ian]

Put up or shut up -- I think Randi said it best.

I'm sorry? Who are you referring to? Who should "put up" what, and why?

 

[TLN]

I'm sorry? Who are you referring to? Who should "put up" what, and why?

Millionframe, you're free to engage Ian if you'd like, but you won't get anywhere. Hence, this thread. If he wants to debate, he can come to PalTalk.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I'm sorry? Who are you referring to? Who should "put up" what, and why?

Shut up, Ian.

 

[Millionframe]

I thought I'd ruffle some oiled feathers, and I believe you are correct TLN. I appreciate someone standing up to those who are of subject here, proper communication is vital to debate, and I'm glad persons on this forum recognize that.

I, personally, have no wish to join a debate at this time.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Come on folks, take TLN up on his offer. At the very least, we get a discussion in real time, rather than at the slow pace of postings. It'll be a fair and engaging debate.

~~ Paul