Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Penn Jillette, here is the evidence you claim you need to debate me

2011-08-03T03:12:09Z

CharlesDN: Undo revision 896602 by CharlesDN (talk)

#REDIRECT [[Talk:Essay: Penn Jillette, here is the evidence you claim you need to debate me]]

Talk:Essay: Penn Jillette, here is the evidence you claim you need to debate me

2011-08-03T03:11:35Z

CharlesDN: Undo revision 896605 by CharlesDN (talk)

== What if.... ==

Penn Jillette would only challenge you to a video debate? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:38, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
:Given the [[atheism|weakness of atheism]], I would be surprised if Penn Jillette formally debates a Bible believer on the existence of God by November 20, 2011. Conservapedia also said, "if Jillette declines to debate Conservapedia we certainly strongly encourage him to seek out the strongest Bible believer opponent who is willing to publicly debate him concerning the existence of God". With that being said, "The written debate will be between Penn Jillette and two atheists of his choosing and myself and two Christians of my choosing. I prefer written debates as I believe they offer the audience the maximum amount of information to render a decision. Oral debates are often subject to the participants' memories and also do not allow additional research to be done on particular points. (Please see: [[Essay: Conservapedia's challenge to atheist Penn Jillette|Conservapedia's challenge to atheist Penn Jillette]])."[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:52, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
::''Oral debates are often subject to the participants memories and also do not allow additional research to be done on particular points'' Not so because if I were to reply to a video on youtube for example I can always go back to it and have just as much time to do research as I would if it were written. If Penn offered a video debate would you accept? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:57, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
:::His medium seems to be primarily video, and yours primarily writing. You've already got the advantage with the terms. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 21:58, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
::::But you cant re-edit yourself fifty times in 20 seconds to correctly spell two words during a video debate. --[[User:MarkN85|MarkN85]] 22:00, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::Max, Penn Jillette is or was a Fellow at the libertarian think tank, the [[Cato Institute]]. In addition, according to Amazon it appears as if he has several books in his name.[http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Penn+jillette&x=0&y=0] I think it is time you stop making excuses for Penn Jillette as far as not accepting my written debate offer. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:12, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::I am not making excuses for anyone. What if Penn made a youtube video accepting your debate but asking for to you declare your qualifications first (which is a standard practice I might add - before any debate they say "So and So from such and such institute vs. Someone who write x number of books on y)? And what if he would only do a video debate, would you accept? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:16, 2 August 2011 (EDT)

== Unfathomably Stupid ==

This page is unbelievable, even by the standards that we have come to expect from "Conservative". I have seen the little video clip from Mr. Jillette, in which he dismissed Conservapedia as a backwater web site, and dismissed "Conservative" as a nothing. The hubris (you can look it up) and arrogance of ''demanding'' that a known TV personality must debate you, under some deadline, is staggering. He has no intention of debating or otherwise engaging you. I'm surprised that he even posted a second video.

Since you like to demand that people debate you, try this on: I, user SamHB, demand that you debate me on the subject of the [[Generalized linear model]]. We won't bother with seconds; just you and me. You have until ... let's see, this is 1 day later than your demand of Mr. Jillette, so ... November 21, 2011. The usual format—written. You will show your erudition (see above) on this subject, and I will quiz you on same. By the way, in the article you never say how the ''generalized'' linear model differs from the plain linear model.

I know that you fancy yourself an expert on this subject, since you wrote the article, and even demanded that someone read about it while you and he were in some discussion of atheism or whatever. At that time, you seemed, in a number of edits, to be saying that you knew that the Generalized linear model held the key to proving that God exists. Or that theists are more charitable than atheists. Whatever. We have 4 months to refresh our memories on what your claims were. Then you can crunch the numbers for us.

You seem to be getting yourself awfully worked up over this issue. Now I know that being mocked by a famous show-business personality is rather degrading, but you brought this on yourself. And you continue to do so.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 22:39, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
::::SamHB, I have asked you to show me outstanding content that you have created which has gained a large following to show me how it is done and you have yet to do so. I think it is time you showed me how it's done. I don't expect this to happen though. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:43, 2 August 2011 (EDT)

:::::Hi Conservative, new user here. I think you need to take a deep breath and calm down. I understand that this debate with Penn was important to you, and you are angry that he rejected you so dismissively. But I think it's pretty clear that he won't debate you. I think Penn genuinely doesn't seem himself as a part of the new atheist movement or anything; he is primarily an illusionist who has a show about debunking what he thinks are false claims, and on occasion he comments on religion or atheism. He also seems like a very busy man. If the guy doesn't want to debate, then he doesn't want to debate. However, I'm sure there are plenty of atheists out there who would want to debate you, though. Someone less prominent, like youtubers TheAmazingAtheist, Pat Condell, and QualiaSoup (all nonetheless very popular online), would probably jump at the chance.[[User:SolomonM|SolomonM]] 23:00, 2 August 2011 (EDT)

::Sam, Conservative doesn't debate people who are willing to debate him. He only issues challenges to people who are highly unlikely to want to have anything to do with him. He has been challenged a number of times previously and has refused the challenges. He then goes off and writes articles about how other people are cowards for failing to debate their point of view. Allow me to demonstrate:

:::Oh, User:Conservative, I challenge you to debate me on your pet subject of atheism. Just you and me buddy. Mano-a-mano. Show the world that you have the machismo!

::You watch Sam. He will chicken out of this challenge just as he has chickened out of all of the previous challenges. He will then run off and write about how Richard Dawkins is a coward for not debating somee creationist or other. --[[User:CharlesDN|CharlesDN]] 23:07, 2 August 2011 (EDT)

Talk:Essay: Penn Jillette, here is the evidence you claim you need to debate me

2011-08-03T03:11:07Z

CharlesDN: Undo revision 896603 by CharlesDN (talk) Oops. Didn't see the move

Talk:Penn Jillette, here is the evidence you claim you need to debate me

2011-08-03T03:07:27Z

CharlesDN:

== Unfathomably Stupid ==

This page is unbelievable, even by the standards that we have come to expect from "Conservative". I have seen the little video clip from Mr. Jillette, in which he dismissed Conservapedia as a backwater web site, and dismissed "Conservative" as a nothing. The hubris (you can look it up) and arrogance of ''demanding'' that a known TV personality must debate you, under some deadline, is staggering. He has no intention of debating or otherwise engaging you. I'm surprised that he even posted a second video.

Since you like to demand that people debate you, try this on: I, user SamHB, demand that you debate me on the subject of the [[Generalized linear model]]. We won't bother with seconds; just you and me. You have until ... let's see, this is 1 day later than your demand of Mr. Jillette, so ... November 21, 2011. The usual format—written. You will show your erudition (see above) on this subject, and I will quiz you on same. By the way, in the article you never say how the ''generalized'' linear model differs from the plain linear model.

I know that you fancy yourself an expert on this subject, since you wrote the article, and even demanded that someone read about it while you and he were in some discussion of atheism or whatever. At that time, you seemed, in a number of edits, to be saying that you knew that the Generalized linear model held the key to proving that God exists. Or that theists are more charitable than atheists. Whatever. We have 4 months to refresh our memories on what your claims were. Then you can crunch the numbers for us.

You seem to be getting yourself awfully worked up over this issue. Now I know that being mocked by a famous show-business personality is rather degrading, but you brought this on yourself. And you continue to do so.

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 22:39, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
:SamHB, I have asked you to show me outstanding content that you have created which has gained a large following to show me how it is done and you have yet to do so. I think it is time you showed me how it's done. I don't expect this to happen though. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:43, 2 August 2011 (EDT)

::Sam, Conservative doesn't debate people who are willing to debate him. He only issues challenges to people who are highly unlikely to want to have anything to do with him. He has been challenged a number of times previously and has refused the challenges. He then goes off and writes articles about how other people are cowards for failing to debate their point of view. Allow me to demonstrate:

:::Oh, User:Conservative, I challenge you to debate me on your pet subject of atheism. Just you and me buddy. Mano-a-mano. Show the world that you have the machismo!

::You watch Sam. He will chicken out of this challenge just as he has chickened out of all of the previous challenges. He will then run off and write about how Richard Dawkins is a coward for not debating somee creationist or other. --[[User:CharlesDN|CharlesDN]] 23:07, 2 August 2011 (EDT)