We talked earlier about splitting up the blog. I wonder if there would be an ability to separate it into areas for more chatting and talk about club administration and activities, not necessarily philosophical writings. What follows is some brain-storming for some debates. If anyone has any ideas, more or less realistic, please feel free.

Let the debate ideas begin!
 
A debate on whether or not there should even BE Creationism versus Evolution debates.

• The issues at hand are that scientists feel insulted to even debate what they see as such a self-evident rule of nature. This has allowed creationists to further their agenda while being thought by the scientific community as hardly worth paying attention to. The creation science movement has grown and developed, but are still thought of as marginal by most scientists. Those on the creation side feel that evolution cannot exist with their worldview and must be challenged (and defeated).


• How can one debate with an ideology that cannot be refuted by any evidence (non-falsifiable).


• Should we also debate that the planet earth sits on the backs of an infinite stack of giant turtles?

 
A debate between someone who represents VHEMT.org (The voluntary human extinction movement) and a pro-lifer.

1. I would be very much willing to represent VHEMT.org.

 
Debates between two people that are completely insane.

• There would be questions formulated that both parties would be able to go over and think about beforehand, and then the engagement would become. They would include many things with no logical links, and the deeper meaning would hopefully be to question discourse in itself.


• Lindsey Nelson would be a great candidate for one (or both :) of the debaters.

 
Tabloid Debate

• 10 (or so) Weekly World News issues would be collected, parallels made, a conspiracy formed, and a position created. The position would be stated directly, and a challenge issued.


• Weekly World News (2) tells the story of two escaped French chemists, Henri Mevel and Jean-Michael DuPont, who allegedly plan to poison every human on the planet to "save it from pollution and overpopulation." Interpol's Marc Jubert admits, "we don't know exactly what Mevel and DuPont are making but if we don't stop them in time the results will be devastating... They may be mad, but they aren't crazy." (stole this, didn’t write it myself.)

 
Unite the Radicals debates.

1. Wouldn't it be great to get the celibate versus the nympho, or something like that.


2. A SPAM emailer versus anyone with a rational mind.


3. To follow up on the death penalty idea, how about someone who is being put to death versus an executioner?

 
 
And likewise, two people that believe the same thing having a debate!

1. They would be able to nod and agree with each other.


2. Everyone would watch in amazement as they got along great.


3. The audience would not be allowed to interrupt despite

 
 And on and on and on.