5
« on: January 12, 2018, 06:09:39 PM »
I would like to bring this topic back, because I want FE'ers to understand it completely. The British way to measure credit was talked about near the end, and FE'ers need to understand what it meant, because lately I've noticed that you guys aren't thinking about it. The main idea is that when given questions or when saying you have a theory you must provide an answer and proof. The RE has provided proof time and time again. The FE has never given any good proof. Therefore, they have a lower score than the RE. In response, I have come up with this idea of some good debate rules.
1. If you have consistently answered questions with answers and proof, you raise your score.
2. Proof must be sufficient, and able to explain to someone who has knowledge of the science you're talking about.
3. This is the most important one! If your score is lower than the other side's score, you must provide proof before you deny others.
Rule three is the one I have seen violated a lot. FE'ers have never given proof, but they continually deny RE. So don't annoy people by saying "Blank is wrong because of Blank" unless you have proof. Get some darn proof before saying we're wrong!