Proposed Debate: TruthSeeker1234 vs. RMackey

[TruthSeeker1234]

Draft 1.0

Debate will take place for one hour taped at a public access t.v. studio in the Los Angeles area. Set will be a desk seating 3 (RMackey, Moderator, TruthSeeker1234), with television monitor behind it facing the cameras. An additional monitor will be present off camera presenting the participants the live feed.

RMackey and TruthSeeker1234 will each bring laptop computers, both of which will be hooked up to an input switcher under the control of the moderator. The output of the input switcher is routed to the on-camera monitor.

RMackey and TruthSeeker1234 each write 5 questions for the other. These are submitted to the moderator at the beginning of the show, and are kept secret until being read during the Q & A section later.

RMackey will begin by stating "The 3 buildings at the World Trade center were brought down by a combination of impact damage and fires" (or words to that effect). RMackey will then proceed to present his case for 10 minutes, utilizing his laptop and the monitor as desired, interacting (or not) with the moderator, as desired. TruthSeeker1234 will remain quiet during this time.

TruthSeeker1234 will begin by stating "The 3 buildings at the World Trade Center were brought down by pre-planted incindiaries and explosives" (or words to that effect). TruthSeeker1234 will then proceed to present his case for 10 minutes, utilizing his laptop and the monitor as desired, interacting (or not) with the moderator, as desired. RMackie will remain quiet during this time.

RMackey rebuttal for 5 minutes.
TruthSeeker1234 rebuttal for 5 minutes.

The Moderator begins reading the pre-submitted questions. First asks TruthSeeker a question written by Mackie, then the reverse.

Continue alternating Q & A until all 10 questions are done. Should take about 12 minutes.

Live call in question. Both participants comment.

Final clock is checked, remaining air time (about 6 minutes), is divied up equally for RMackey closing statement, then TruthSeeker1234 closing statement.

 

[Bell]

*Ahum*

*walks in*

How's about debating one on one with Mackey on here these boards?

*walks out*

A televised debate seems a bit unrealistic to me.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

id like to suggest the 10 min "case presentations" should be prewritten, and submitted to the moderator beforehand, to prevent rebuttal attempts prior to designated rebuttal time allotment (specifically during the second parties statements, regardless if TS1234 or Mackey speaks second)

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

A televised debate seems a bit unrealistic to me.

A televised debate is unrealistic, and buildings pulverizing themselves under their own weight, that's realistic?

Hmmmmmmm.

 

[Gravy]

Alternate proposal:

Truthseeker1234 demonstrates that he has the slightest understanding of R. Mackey's posts.

JREF forum erupts with applause.

 

[Ducky]

Draft 1.0

RMackey and TruthSeeker1234 will each bring laptop computers, both of which will be hooked up to an input switcher under the control of the moderator. The output of the input switcher is routed to the on-camera monitor.

What is the function and purpose of an "input switcher" in this application? I am very familiar with computers (both hardware and software) and don't understand what this device is or what the function of use of the device is. In fact, as a sound engineer that relies solely on digital recording and computers, the only thing I can think of as an "input switcher" in regards to a laptop is using a mixing board with a firewire card to channel mix many signals of audio. What "input" are you switching, and what function to the debate would it serve?

Also, I do not understand why you can't use your laptop computers to debate here? There certainly is resource to have a moderated debate thread between you two. All you would need to do is ask a moderator to set it up for you.

 

[Bell]

A televised debate is unrealistic, and buildings pulverizing themselves under their own weight, that's realistic?

Hmmmmmmm.

Yes* and no. The buildings didn't pulverize. Contents of the buildings pulverized.

*I don't see what TV station in the US would be interested in such a debate (but that's looking at it from the Netherlands).

 

[Dog Town]

Is this a joke? Why would RM waste time with the likes of you?
Delusions of Grandeur much?

 

[Bell]

Alternate proposal:

Truthseeker1234 demonstrates that he has the slightest understanding of R. Mackey's posts.

JREF forum erupts with applause.

Producing pyroclastic clouds?

 

[Childlike Empress]

If it's real: Great. Good luck to both of you and may the truth prevail.

 

[Pardalis]

If it's real: Great. Good luck to both of you and may the truth prevail.

Oh for crying out loud, don't tell me you believe that controlled demolition idiocy?

 

[WildCat]

I propose the debate take place on live TV, during halftime of NBC's "Football Night in America" next Sunday.

Or we just have a closed thread here just for them, either one works for me.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

What is the function and purpose of an "input switcher" in this application? I am very familiar with computers (both hardware and software) and don't understand what this device is or what the function of use of the device is. In fact, as a sound engineer that relies solely on digital recording and computers, the only thing I can think of as an "input switcher" in regards to a laptop is using a mixing board with a firewire card to channel mix many signals of audio. What "input" are you switching, and what function to the debate would it serve?

Also, I do not understand why you can't use your laptop computers to debate here? There certainly is resource to have a moderated debate thread between you two. All you would need to do is ask a moderator to set it up for you.

well i assume in this case it would be a video switch so the moderator could see what either party is doing on the laptops, and display it to the "tv audience"

i would like to see TS1234 participate in a good, impartially moderated debate, but i really dont see that happening



impartial: adj. Someone who agrees that the US government carried out 9/11
[/ctdictionary]

 

[Ducky]

well i assume in this case it would be a video switch so the moderator could see what either party is doing on the laptops, and display it to the "tv audience"

i would like to see TS1234 participate in a good, impartially moderated debate, but i really dont see that happening



impartial: adj. Someone who agrees that the US government carried out 9/11
[/ctdictionary]

this would be a display switcher, and would depend on both laptops having compatible video output. It would be easier for them both to have their own display projector hooked up to each computer, and have them both displayed above them.

No need for switching.

Of course, this is all moot next to my suggestion to have the debate here.


thanks for the clarifacation, default.

 

[Bell]

I think BS101 is full of BS...

I have yet to see him commit to his following remark:

Everyone is dodging my questions too! Perhaps we could set up a thread where it was one on one, say me against Mackey, or Gravy or somebody. Then structure an actual debate, with postive statements, rebutalls etc.

<snip>

... in this thread.

 

[Gravy]

I think BS101 is full of BS...

I have yet to see him commit to his following remark:
... in this thread.

If T1234 doesn't think his statements have been rebutted here, he's living in Christopheraland.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

i could set up a debate forum over at the SLC board, of course im sure someone will point out im not unbiased (not that it matters, i still think a fair debate should be fair)

 

[Regnad Kcin]

A televised debate is unrealistic, and buildings pulverizing themselves under their own weight, that's realistic?

Yup. (Except, of course, it's a little more complicated than that, as you well know.)

 

[T.A.M.]

Draft 1.0
Debate will take place for one hour taped at a public access t.v. studio in the Los Angeles area. Set will be a desk seating 3 (RMackey, Moderator, TruthSeeker1234), with television monitor behind it facing the cameras. An additional monitor will be present off camera presenting the participants the live feed.

RMackey and TruthSeeker1234 will each bring laptop computers, both of which will be hooked up to an input switcher under the control of the moderator. The output of the input switcher is routed to the on-camera monitor.

Closed thread here seems much easier. Is the point of the "debate" to debate the facts or see who has the best memory and quickest mouseclick. This is not a political debate, where one is trying to win votes based on stage presences and quick, definitive response, this is a debate of the facts and evidence. There is no point to it being live, or telivised, or with 5 minute time limits, or any of that. That is just unneeded.

RMackey and TruthSeeker1234 each write 5 questions for the other. These are submitted to the moderator at the beginning of the show, and are kept secret until being read during the Q & A section later.

questions...that is not appropriate, pick a topic or a "Theory" and debate it...what questions could be of any worth more than debating a topic or "theory".

RMackey will begin by stating "The 3 buildings at the World Trade center were brought down by a combination of impact damage and fires" (or words to that effect). RMackey will then proceed to present his case for 10 minutes, utilizing his laptop and the monitor as desired, interacting (or not) with the moderator, as desired. TruthSeeker1234 will remain quiet during this time.

TruthSeeker1234 will begin by stating "The 3 buildings at the World Trade Center were brought down by pre-planted incindiaries and explosives" (or words to that effect). TruthSeeker1234 will then proceed to present his case for 10 minutes, utilizing his laptop and the monitor as desired, interacting (or not) with the moderator, as desired. RMackie will remain quiet during this time.

RMackey rebuttal for 5 minutes.
TruthSeeker1234 rebuttal for 5 minutes.

The Moderator begins reading the pre-submitted questions. First asks TruthSeeker a question written by Mackie, then the reverse.

Continue alternating Q & A until all 10 questions are done. Should take about 12 minutes.

Live call in question. Both participants comment.

Final clock is checked, remaining air time (about 6 minutes), is divied up equally for RMackey closing statement, then TruthSeeker1234 closing statement.

once again no need.

What is wrong with the proposals that have already been suggested. The only thing we need to get it going is an unbiased moderator.

TAM

 

[Loss Leader]

This reminds me of a case that I had a few years ago in which I made an offer to sit down with the othr side to discuss settlement. They declined. I brought a motion to0 exclude some of their evidence and invited them to talks again. They declined. The judge decided the motion in my favor at a court appearance. Afterwards, the attorney for the other side came over and asked when I would be available for settlement talks. I told him there would be no talks. He became very animated and asked why I wouldn't sit down with them.

I remember laughing in his face. "Why should I? I'm winning."



P.S. We just learned a little more about TS1234. He lives in L.A.