Unofficial challenge to Carleas

I challenge Carleas to a debate of all things philosophical and relating to any area thereof found to be on these boards in terms of psychology, theology, philosophy on its own, science and technology. Recognizing him as unofficial monarch/ruler of these forums and not wishing to take ownership of said message board from him, the challenge is for unofficial titles only. The guidelines for me: no swearing, bully tactics, use of mysticism or supernatural affectations, tearing apart his arguments whether I believe they have holes in them or not and any further such stipulations as may be agreed by him and others to cause me to ‘lose’. Guidelines for him: no holds barred.

This will end poorly.

Prepare for some 007 Golden Eye gifs in your PM box from Carleas, I’ve tried reporting his posts in the past, nothing works. You’ve been warned.

A debate between the two could certainly improve the entertainment quality of the site.

I don’t think this is a good prompt for a real debate, but I would be happy to engage you in an open-ended discussion in another forum (could be Philosophy, could be Rant, depending on how much rigor you’re interested in).

I told you all he is intentionally undermining this section. Clearly was called out for a debate, dodged it. He think’s he is Neo dodging bullets.

Random Factor is declared the winner, cause Carleas is the quitter.

A refusal of challenge is an admission of defeat. It is one thing to sit in the background and watch and learn while avoiding confrontation and to form your analyses and conjectures without hands on experience and quite another to be caught up in the moment and whether your analyses and conjectures are right or wrong, become wrong and prove to be unfully fleshed when faced by the heat of the moment as your brain becomes useless and forces you to act in the moment without your answers.

One thing to be an observer interacting on such terms than to be more than watcher and observer and entering the fray yourself. It is why I never had much interest in sitting on a throne or being King or ruler or being forced into a position of administrative staff where I am unable to act in the capacity needed that so many would refuse to allow such positions to act in.

It is far worse to be God and unable act without disillusioning followers and believers and spoiled angels than to be simply just a man no matter how many try to slander, misconstrue, badmouth and make out to be a devil. Free to fight or enslaved to a very perilous position of inactivity and trapped by those who allow you to think so highly of yourself.

It’s not all beautiful, Carleas.


Correct, some times it isn’t, on the occasion when a challenge itself is fallacious. This is not such a fallacious challenge, however and a refusal to accept said challenge is an admittance of a defeat that was already had prior to this occasion when I asked him to explain to me his theories and works and he refused.

But, next time, I do expect more than one word from you or any other. What I explained should have been what you were capable of explaining. Things require more than just a single word to prove them as fact.

I’m happy to discuss things with you, we can even call it a debate. But it’s not good grist for a Debate forum debate.

In the interim, may I propose a challenge?

This one:

That Random and Turd discuss and debate the true nature of God.

After all, once that is established all of the other factors in the OP ought to fall right in line.

Not good grist. You say you’d be happy to discuss, but already turned that down when I offered you the chance to. You saying so here and now is just to make yourself look better without any real intention to have discussion. Complete bullshit sentiment.

Iambiguous’ suggestion is more aimed towards seeing a senseless argument in verbal brawling fashion than anything resembling a debate. I’m not interested in gladiatorial combat. I’m tired of so nany things turning my attempts at conversation and communication into that. Not tired enough to be done fighting things that should be fought, but thoroughly sick and tired of the depravity of so many.

But the sheer fact of the moment is that Carleas has not spent one day earning a single victory in this colosseum and would rather discuss than fight and is of the same mind I am in that at least, to have the sense enough to know that since he has not the experience of a veteran fighter, that all of his reason in such a conversation between us here would cause him to directly face too many things that would turn it into another brawl whether he had better reason at the start or not and would have him lose in too many ways.

And, he has rather largely assumed that I meant to fight him since the term debate has been long believed to be about arguing and fighting. It has long since pushed actual discussion out of the scene to be about those things.

And, since carleas has not spent one day in the colosseum and if he has under another name, he has not done so for right reason and lacks the experience of fighting with right reason, which would be the guise he would prefer Carleas to have, he would be at a complete loss to even claim to be able to relate.

And, any person that would make the claim, even if not directly making it, of owning better reason or rationality than another while refusing to prove it in the context of a situation such as this as being called to prove his worth by someone who has had to fight for everything, would already have lost. They would already be showing the fallibility of their own reasoning for being caught in a lie that isn’t a direct lie because they lack the courage of even that and shows even further their inability to rule or even earn and command respect. And such an owner of such a place designed for philosophy who can not be respected is not doing right by it when he would sit back and let another clean up the messes in his property, in his house and think to any length that it would still be his property, his house, just because he paid to keep it running. That, at any point that he assumed he could keep his mouth shut and let someone else do his work only to reenter at any time and have anyone respect his philosophies or rationalities or refusals to perform, that he assumed far too much since he would have failed to account for the reasoning that states that he must fight to earn respect.

Keep your administrator status. Keep running this message board. Keep keeping your mouth shut and fuming inwardly and playing your games of sleight of hand, deception and manipulation to frivolous ends. Just don’t forget the real power that walked through.

I have proved every claim I’ve made, proved every theory I’ve ever posited and have won every argument and fight through the sheer determination to not be dragged down too far and to continue pushing forth what I would rather see of the progression of ideas and concepts against the stranglehold of belligerence, hate and irrationality.

To enter any contest with me at all would be to enter into a losing battle. To not enter at all is to lose. I win even while I lose and win even while I win and win even when I turn down challenges and win even while refusing to adapt or learn and while so many have tried to imitate or duplicate my successes throughout time and space, have only managed to create pale mockeries, caused themselves to be doomed and fated to massive failures.

And the fact of that still not causing me to have any failure or loss due to so many things in so many ways, is still a victory of mine. I don’t even have to convince myself that I win, because I still don’t enjoy the victory, it leaves a sour taste to an extent and is still a greater victory than anyone or anything else in eternity will ever know. And, I get to wear it. I deserved it, earned it, have the glory I never chased that is just empty glory for the tragedies and the suffering and the pain.

And, even you, Carleas, wanted the glory that is mine without having to earn it. Even you failed the test.

An argument makes sense [to me] given the extent to which one is able to close the gap between what they profess to believe [or claim to know] is true “in their head” and that which they are able to demonstrate that all reasonable men and women are obligated to believe/to know in turn.

You and Turd either believe in a God, the God, my God or you do not.

You and Turd are either able to demonstrate to others the existence of this God or you are not.

You and Turd are either able to connect the dots between God on this side of the grave and God on the other side of the grave or you are not.

Otherwise you are just two more “true believers” taking a leap of faith to one or another historical, cultural and experiential rendition of God.

And there are dozens of them already.

I’ve already proven myself to be God incarnate in the flesh beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt and have even gone so far as to have you believe it. Do you also expect me to be able to force you to admit it as if that were part of it, that if you simply refuse to admit it, then it stops being True?

And that is where turtle is different. I’ve proved my god exists by being my god in the flesh as it still exists outside of the flesh and thus have even proven to be turtles’ god, turtle is unable to prove the existence of his god because he simply doesn’t need to. His god has a strong tendency of proving his own existence. As to make you admit It? Openly? I’m sure that your admittance is not that important and that you believe regardless.

Gee, no wonder Carleas is scared to debate you!! :wink:

Not scared to debate me, scared of losing himself in doing so when hed rather discuss things on a conversational level, and such fear is not weakness nor is it unjustified.

It’s true. I am fearful and weak. How am I supposed to hold my own before god himself?

Thanks for gracing our humble site with your presence, your majesty.

Then why don’t you actually ‘debate’ and discuss Things? At the very least, all I said was that you actually did just want to talk about things to further philosophy rationally without fighting and didn’t trust the audience not to force you into something you would surely be at a loss against in terms of negativity, bitterness, arguing and fighting and insulting. I’m not painting myself as the be all end all by any means, just that more gains can be made by working together than fighting, since we’d then be able to fill in the gaps of knowledge to further society. At the point of letting go of ego and pride and need for credit to be given, we’d actually be able to discuss such things as psychology rationally, push technology forward in better terms and woukdnt be sitting there so paranoid of someone stealing credit for our work, wouldnt even care, because then it wouldnt be about that but doing it for simply the love of it. The passion of the philosopher. However, it is possible that I sorely underestimated you in that regard and that your are just another hungry predator that wishes he could take credit for my works and knowing he cant.

And believe me, it’s always a ‘pleasure’ to be called into action in your less-than-humble colosseum of the depraved. I really try not to mix business with pleasure, gets a bit twisted at times, and yet here we are. Should I be masturbating while typing my Responses? Seems almost like that’s what people expect me to be doing and it actually seems like theyre upset that im not.

You going to permaban me yet, Wannabe? Or do you want more punishment, first.