Template:Ken debate

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Dear horrible Anonymous User and friends at a rather liberal website starting with an R,

RE: The last comment of yours which I took lightly in terms of the mental aptitude of some obesity-afflicted RationalWikians

1. You and your fellow obese Dawkins-worshippers at a rather atheistic website full of liberal claptrap that starts with an R are not mentally competent enough to find any inaccuracies in Conservapedia's articles on atheism, evolution, or homosexuality, which all largely consist of my writing. Because of the sad fact that there is no proof or evidence that any of these worldviews are actually established facts, it wasn't very challenging for us to think up some articles that cleverly attempt to offer arguments that pertain to these worldviews.

2. I boldly thrashed you folks on the talk pages of the Conservapedia articles that they were rather obviously angered by, plus on other places on the internet as well (atheism, evolution, homosexuality, etc.) Accordingly, your claim that I am afraid to debate has no merit. I am obviously not claiming that it is regarding my excellent debating prowess that I won so many debates with Anonymous User and their fellow probably-obese atheists from a rather liberal website, it is just that atheism is such an incredibly baseless position with a flabby midsection - especially compared to Christianity, which, however, has overwhelming evidence to support it.

3. I met my goals that I sought to achieve pertaining to my participation with Conservapedia, the Trustworthy Encyclopedia. Anything else that I do further is just icing on the cake.

4. Encyclopedias are almost invariably supposed to involve multiple editors and personally, I haven't seen a single encyclopedia that I fully agree with. Feel free to get aggravated at Conservapedia and find problems in it, but I really don't think that you can find a single factual error in the Conservapedia articles in regards to atheism, evolution, or homosexuality.

5. I know that it aggravates to no end that I have met my goals and hereby declare VICTORY, since I have the ability as a Conservapedia sysop to block anyone who has the nerve to persecute me, and yet you still want to find fault in me. However, I have still succeeded in being more like my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ once and for all, in that I have delivered yet another punch to your flabby midsection! You on the other hand, have also succeeded at being more like your Lord and Savior Richard Dawkins, in that you probably largely agree with his rape apologetics in regards to Elevatorgate!

In regards to all of that, I hereby challenge you to A SECOND WRITTEN DEBATE. In this debate, I challenge you to prove to me that atheism is true and correct (which you probably won't be able to do anyway, due to the inherent glass jaw of atheism), and once I achieve victory, it will all but destroy atheism on the internet ONCE AND FOR ALL!!!

However, it will only be under THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS (in bold):

  • In case you attempt to martyr me in your anger as a result of my inevitable VICTORY, I get to bring with me a largely defensive weapon of gun.
  • You are to pay an exact total of $20,000.00 $6,000,000, which will be donated by a trustworthy bible-believer of your choosing to a faith-based Christian charitable organization of your choosing upon successful completion of the debate.
  • The debate will be written, and will be 30 hours long (which can be broken up over a 110 month period).

6. Well so long, you obese, militant, atheistic, and probably homosexual commie! Oh, and one more piece of Christian love for Horrible Anonymous User: I wish that your mother had just aborted you, you ugly, disgusting pig!

DISCLAIMER: It's not that I hate you, it's just that I don't want you to exist. >:-b

Sincerely,

Ruylopez