Faster than light communication with a hammer and nail

First of all, this is also one of my first debates as all the others I accepted were either trolls, forfits, or just haven't really meant anythnig. I'm not saying your format is bad and that I discriminate because of this-since you have adressed the fact that you are new, I'm trying to just give you an FYI so that you don't make the same mishap, (mishap compared to general debates on this website,) not trying to harass you. I'm sorry if it came out this way. Secondly, the point of " I say " is all fine and dandy but if only one person says, for an example, "the world is flat. ." then how is it countering everyone elses beliefs of: " The world is round ". I mean, to make a point really official throughought history we have seen people in the past have proven their points scientifically but also using evidence and logic, and support from a variety of different views, to ultimantly make their views seem to be the more sensible option to choose/believe [in]. I agree that an opinion without proof IS the evience of a debate, (as you stated previously "Having an opinion without complete proof is the essence of debate. ) but I belive that to start a debate, is to argue and prove one sides opinion absoulute throughout arguments, rebuttals, evidence, sources, and proof. Otherwise, anyone could just use opinion after opinion but none of their statements would have any real argumental effect as they would be invalid-as the would be no real point of just having an entirely opinion-based argument as everyone would declare their argument surpreme, and would then lead to arguments and anger between both sides. Rebuttals, Responses, and Arguments/Points 1. ) "This is a thought experiment at this point. " When you said this, what did you mean? Personally, everything is a thought experiment-its an experiment to even think or exist. .. and I do not honestly get what you mean. If you look at it from my view, a debate is an argument which provokes thought, (aka thought experiement,) and causes people to think and really truly attempt to put up a good argument to counter the opponent. At dictionary. com, [1] the definition of 'experiment' is defined as, (note I am trying to write everything exactly as the same format as presented on the website, forgive any spelling or grammar errors as I expect myself to make a few,) Ex-per-i-ment Noun 1. a test, trial, or tentative procedure; an act or operation for the purpose of discovering something unknown or of testing a principle, supposition, etc. : a chemical experiment; a teaching experiment; an experiment in living. 2. the conducting of such operations; experimentation: a product that is the result of long experiment. 3. Obsolete , experience. verb (used without object) 4. to try or test, especially in order to discover or prove something: to experiment with a new procedure. Based off of what was presented in this commonly used, trusted, and the fact that evidence in the past supports that my source has always provided a logical, universal meaning for words used in languag, give or take, experiment is defined on this source as something that is testing something, discovering, or going into the unknown. For an example, like the experiment of sending man to the moon, would be considered an experient as it is an attempt/test/trial/teach experiment, (providing all definitions given above where I showed what dictionary. com defined experiment as,) as logic and evidence and records of what the purpose of this mission was, (send man to the moon, which is a test,) and therefore fitting the criteria defined in the definition of 'experiment'. The second definition of 'experiment' is the outcome of an experiment, (see above for exact words,) the product or the benefit of conducting such an experiment and/or test. The product of sending man to the moon, was scientific and other benefit for fields associated with astronomy and etc. Therefore, this is what the second definition means. The third definition is defined as gaining experience, which is basically defined on the same website, [2], and if you wish to see the definition go to [2] where I put up my source for experience. In other words, the third defintion of experiment is basically gaining knowledge about a field or area of something. (I'm not going to go include the fourth definition as the verb form of experiment is the most commonly used and the logical person already defines experiment as the fourth definition, so basically its common knowledge,) So when you said " This is a thought experiment at this point " you meant that we're setting out to discover something new? Obviously, usually a debate is made to settle a matter and make NEW points and cause thoughts to provoke and to prove oneself the superior opinion in the argument. Therefore, you are correct when you state that this is a thought experiment as all debates are thought experiments, as my points and evidence above shows definitions and how what you said makes sense. Why you choose to use this as an argument beats me, however. 3. "Your request for [BOP, I persume you mispelled it and put Bob] a Bob is to say that I have to find someone else who can settle this for us" First of all, when I said that you must provide a burden of proof, I meant that you being the pro of this argument, your side has the burden of providing the proof, the evidence behind your statement, therefore not just making up baseless statement such as "I am the master of Earth" and not provide any arguments. I don't understand how you defid this as someone else to settle this, as burden of proof means that the burden of making arguments and proving your point is on your side, as proving [faster then light communication with a hammer and nail] your point or side on this argumental debate is up to YOU, as I will prove how your arguments, (or try to prove,) are not correct, or how my point is more established and backed up then yours. Then you go on to say "if this is a new idea then the burden is on us to work this out" of course it is. I'm saying the BURDEN OF PROOF! You are proving that you are correct, and I am proving that you are incorrect, therefore you first must prove yourself correct, which is exactly what I said. I'm sorry if what I said confused you or you thought something else, but if you don't understand BOP or think this confusing, feel free to say so in comments before making us lose a round to argue, as now we only have two rounds left, and thats is a very low amount of time to argue. 4. "the essence of this topic is to examine the difference between a photon at has to travel a distance, compared to a chain of molecules that are all simultaneously pushed forward" Okay, but if this is what your debate is about, then in the future add this along with the other points in the first round as now that you have shown me what you wish to argue it really clarifies and clears things up, as previously I had been confused and not sure what some of your wording in argments meant. # So if we're examing the difference between a photon that has to travel a distance, compared to a chain of molecules that are simultaneously pushed forward, then what does this have to do with your first round? Any viewer would have to go by themselves and look up what each one of these points meant, and how the simole you provided in R1 has meaning and is alike [the essence. .. .. between a photon that has to travel a distance, compared to a chain of molecules that are simltaneously pushed forward]. First of all, I am also one of the people who have no sense of what the hammer represents and the nail represents, as not only are the voters judging on arguments, but on sources as well and you seem to have neglected to provide a source to show viewers and your opposition how and what each of these terms means and represents in your R1 analogy. (Note, for those of you who hate me for using the glitch to provide a more lengthy reponse, know that the restrictions were down to 1000 characters per round, and I could barely put up anything as 1000 characters only let me get to adressing his first point, and I would have had to provide a very poor grammaratized argument as this rebuttal in my opinion reqires a lengthy argument as I feel the need to provide all evidence and points/views that I have and that I noticed,) Sources: [1]: . http://dictionary.reference.com... [2]: . http://dictionary.reference.com... Note: If my opponent chooses to not accept my sources as valid or correct, then please state this and state why and what led you to believe and concur my sources as false or invalid.