THE OFFICIAL IZBO TRIAL; Resolved: Izbo10 should be permanently banned

Before getting back to the overwhelming stupidity of this board a couple points: Most people on this board are not atheists, cerebral is not an atheist, if he is he's a defacto atheist, but he has said things that make me think he clearly holds a belief in god and the same with mig. The majority on here are christian that is a blatant and utter lie. Read your b.s. and weep ddo's demographics page: http://www.debate.org... It is mainly christian. Even our prosecutor is too stupid to grasp that belief is to have trust or confidence in. If you are not sure you are without or lacking belief in god. Is it the or part "or" part of his own definition that gets you jackasses? prefix A- can mean ‘lacking' or ‘against you do realize that this means that atheism means either 1: lacking theism 2: against theism You can be one or the other, you don't need to be both. The definition allows for strong and weak atheism. This is so simple yet people on this board don't grasp that. His own definition defeated him yet he conveniently was unable to comprehend a 1 syllable two letter word like "or." The stupidity on this board is really too strong to rationalize with. Even a supposedly respected member such as blue steel cannot grasp the word "or." Strangely he was not even able to get it after the university of Cambridge puts the A- as meaning- without http://www.investigatingatheism.info... right in the top graphic. Fucktarded much? This is the type of stuff I deal with on a daily basis, the failure to comprehend basic words. That leads me to zombies, we are going to use your definition of zombies and I guarantee you it is going to say exactly what I want it to say. I showed this previously and yet cerebral is too stupid to comprehend it. You can look back at the posts: reï¿½anï¿½iï¿½mate (r-n-mt) tr.v. reï¿½anï¿½iï¿½matï¿½ed, reï¿½anï¿½iï¿½matï¿½ing, reï¿½anï¿½iï¿½mates 1. To give new life to: Her dancing reanimates the classical style. 2. To bring to life; evoke powerfully or effectively http://www.thefreedictionary.com... Strange it means to bring back to life. Wow, changing the words to a different word that means the exact same thing does not change my argument. Again a demonstration of stupidity. I want you to show me one definition that says the skin is not alive, that is not a prerequisite to be a zombie. By the way if you want to get semantically about it, the first few layers of our skin is dead, so go fucks yourself, the first few layers of his skin is dead. I even showed that the Night of the Living dead was about dead bodies coming back to life, yet these fucktards were not intelligent enough to grasp that a zombie is a dead body coming back to life. None of this is a new argument, yet they have still yet to grasp this. Intelligence is not something frequently used here. Next my opponent says that this has nothing to do with morals, really, Im sorry did you not understand this debate is about whether I "ought" to be banned. Ought being a moral concept here. Should you ban me because I harm the site is clearly and utterly a moral topic, yet you have a prosecutor who thinks I have done nothing wrong. Yet at the same time saying I did something wrong. This creates a conflict. The burden of proof is on you, since one of your team members doesn't think there is anything inherently wrong with anything wrong, I would ask for cerebral, one of your prosecutors, to testify that I did nothing inherently wrong. At this point the case must be thrown out because then there is no reason for me to be banned as being banned would imply I did something wrong. The stupidity of putting a moral nihilist on your team was priceless. Before you can prosecute me you must prove that I did something wrong, that ought to be interesting being one of your team members doesn't even believe in wrong. He goes on to talk about the forum activity I create, I have taught people about bible historicity like the gospel of Q, that Jesus was resurrected bodily, lost gospels and more. I put up valuable lessons debunking Christian Philosophical arguments, and teaching lessons in Philosophy. It is not my fault, as has been demonstrated, that this board does not contain the intelligence level to discuss these topics in a way that would create good dialogue. Instead the topics end up with me talking down to people. Now, onto vote bombing. I vote against people who make stupid arguments. I try rationalizing, I try mockery and it doesn't work. Now, everyone on here always says well look at my debate record. So, most of the time I read there debates it is inherently retarded so I vote against them. Now, there was one time that I don't remember the name, I voted on his debate, I didn't bother reading his debate because he didn't read mine. Yes, I did that because the idiot posted on my debate, something like Izbo did not defeat any of the opponents arguments. I posted the fallacy the guy used and why it was a fallacy on it. So, he could not have read it. When he got called out for his actions instead of being a man he left. Those are not valuable members on a site and was actually helpful getting a vote bombing troll off the site. Since Innomen only cares about keeping people who are anti christian off the site and does not care about intergrity at some point you must take the methods necessary to change the culture of a site. That may not be Innonmens fault as he is the president of a debate site and has shown a lack of knowledge of what a debate site is: osted by: Profile Card izbo10 No, this is a debate site if you can't form an argument you should not be here. Is this a troll board or a debate site. Sunday, September 18, 2011 @ 12:59:18 PM Posted by: Profile Card innomen Wanna debate it? Sunday, September 18, 2011 @ 1:03:02 PM Posted by: Profile Card izbo10 deï¿½ï¿½bate (d-bt) v. deï¿½ï¿½batï¿½ï¿½ed, deï¿½ï¿½batï¿½ï¿½ing, deï¿½ï¿½bates v.intr. 1. To consider something; deliberate. 2. To engage in argument by discussing opposing points. 3. To engage in a formal discussion or argument. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...... If you are not providing an argument you are not debating by definition. I guess I am arguing with someone just as stupid. Sunday, September 18, 2011 @ 1:05:21 PM Posted by: Profile Card innomen Would you like to debate me on anything here? Sunday, September 18, 2011 @ 1:12:50 PM Posted by: Profile Card izbo10 You failed to know what a debate is why would I debate someone that can't understand what they are doing. Sunday, September 18, 2011 @ 1:14:44 PM Posted by: Profile Card innomen so you are saying no? Sunday, September 18, 2011 @ 1:21:30 PM Posted by: Profile Card izbo10 yes, if you don't know what a debate is, I will not attempt to debate you, it is an exercise in futility. Sunday, September 18, 2011 @ 1:23:56 PM Posted by: Profile Card innomen Then you are a hypocrite and should be warned. Sunday, September 18, 2011 @ 1:32:26 PM Posted by: Profile Card izbo10 No, i will debate anybody who at least knows what a debate is. You proved you do not. Sunday, September 18, 2011 @ 1:34:14 PM Posted by: Profile Card innomen Okey Dokey. This shows are president in a private message failing at the most basic duty of the site, understanding what the site is about so what do you expect me to do, go to him with problems?