[9/6/2009 9:30:43 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Hey Nick.
[9/6/2009 9:31:15 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: I just got home from a few days in the mountains (Hiking/Camping) and saw your message on my profile.
[9/6/2009 9:32:07 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: I don't check my profile page that often so if you would like to get hold of me sooner an e-mail or skype call would be quicker.
[9/6/2009 9:32:48 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: I would LOVE a debate so contact me ASAP about your suggestions for a format and we will bang it out for a time
[9/6/2009 9:32:49 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Thanx,
[9/6/2009 9:32:52 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Yours
[9/6/2009 9:32:54 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: SP
[9/6/2009 9:33:28 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: BTW it is Sunday 9:30 PM my time and 6:30 yours
[9/6/2009 9:35:21 PM] DoctorAnswers: Have you thought of any ideas?
[9/6/2009 9:37:11 PM] DoctorAnswers: I alow evolutionists to give suggestions and then I alow part of what they want to discuss. So that they can't complaine and say that I am formating everything so that they will fail
[9/6/2009 9:42:41 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Hey there. What I ment by format is how the debate will be conducted and what the specific subject will be.
[9/6/2009 9:42:52 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Just a sec, let me get my headset
[9/6/2009 9:44:03 PM] *** Call to DoctorAnswers, duration 11:01. ***
[9/8/2009 5:17:44 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Hey Nick, Have you thought about the format and subjects for the debate?
[9/8/2009 5:25:12 PM] DoctorAnswers: yes I have
[9/8/2009 5:26:09 PM] DoctorAnswers: I was thinking that I might bring up the idea of humans having 46 chromosomes and chimps having 48.
[9/8/2009 5:27:34 PM] Nick: It seems odd that can happen when we know of the disorders children have with 45
[9/8/2009 5:29:08 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Ok, so a subject to start out with would be the chromosome #'s of humans compared with other primates.
[9/8/2009 5:29:13 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: What about the format?
[9/8/2009 5:29:52 PM] Nick: probably have 3 different videos of a subject for both of us
[9/8/2009 5:30:03 PM] Nick: then refute and then conclude
[9/8/2009 5:30:50 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Please clarify? What would you like the debate to look like?
[9/8/2009 5:32:15 PM] Nick: We both have our topics. We have a into vid then 3 I have 3 vids and you have 3 vids and then we refute those vids. Then conclude
[9/8/2009 5:37:21 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: So do you mean what You start with a intro, then I have an intro, then we have 3 rounds of back and fourth, concluding with a final statement from each of us?
[9/8/2009 5:37:38 PM] Nick: Yes
[9/8/2009 5:37:53 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Ok.
[9/8/2009 5:38:02 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: When would you like to start?
[9/8/2009 5:38:50 PM] Nick: I might hava a video up today if I come up with two more ideas
[9/8/2009 5:46:41 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: The reason I asked is that I have a busy week at school (it just started this week) and will not have a lot of time to make a video, BUT can bust one out on Saturday.
[9/8/2009 5:48:23 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: So...how about this as a schedule (which is the next thing we need to talk about anyway): the debate starts Saturday with your Intro. I will produce and post an intro the same day, after yours, and then you will post a response.
[9/8/2009 5:49:01 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: How many days would you like between your Intro and the response to my intro?
[9/8/2009 5:49:20 PM] Nick: I have time on the weekend and Tuesday
[9/8/2009 5:51:54 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: So does that mean that we should have the times between each section as being 3 days??? IE: you post your intro and I post mine on Saturday. You will then post a response on Tuesday and I will do the same. AND then we continue with this pattern?
[9/8/2009 5:52:35 PM] Nick: Yes that is fine because I will have enough break to do my homework
[9/8/2009 5:54:26 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Nice!!! Ok, so I will await your intro on Saturday before posting mine. On Tuesday I will post a response to your intro after you have done the same and then we can work out dates for the additional responses and rebuttals at this point.
[9/8/2009 5:54:41 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Does that sound like a plan?
[9/8/2009 5:54:49 PM] Nick: Good plan
[9/8/2009 5:57:05 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: So to clarify right away I would like to point out that ALL Great Apes (humans, chimps, gorillas, and oranatangs) besides humans have 48 chromosomes, while humans are the only Great Ape that has 46 and that is the topic we are debating with its relation to evolution.
[9/8/2009 5:57:29 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Also I suggest that we have to give references to our claims
[9/8/2009 5:57:45 PM] Nick: Yes I will give URLS
[9/8/2009 5:58:01 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Would you limit yourself to only peer reviewed references?
[9/8/2009 5:58:22 PM] Nick: Yes
[9/8/2009 5:59:29 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Nice. Ok, so I will post this conversation on my blog (given your permission) and advertise the debate on YouTube. Sound like a plan?
[9/8/2009 6:00:22 PM] Nick: permissiongranted and thank you for asking because I know qdragon1337 does not ask
[9/8/2009 6:02:47 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Not a problem Nick. I'll contact you with any additional clarification, questions and references before Saturday and please feel free to mirror my advert video on YouTube before the debate. BTW http://scientiaperceptum.blogspot.com/
[9/8/2009 6:05:04 PM] Nick: My blog although I forgot about it until you brought up yours http://www.blogger.com/home?pli=1
[9/8/2009 6:05:18 PM] ScientiaPerceptum: Thank you
There are a few things I would like to point out.
First of all Nick gave me permission to post this conversation at 6:00:22.
Next, we agreed (5:26:09) that the topic of debate was going to be why all great apes besides humans have 48 chromosomes while humans have 46 (although Nick only points out chimps as an example in the above text). I must say at this point that I thought this would be the only subject for this debate, but I guess I should have specified that before closing the conversation.
Lastly it should be pointed out that Nick agreed (5:58:22) that he would back up his claims with PEER reviewed sources.
So, this being said, Nick posted his first video Yesterday, the 11th of September, with a range of topics following the route of obfuscation I like to call "The Hovind Hop"©, which is just a version of the "Gish Gallop". Due to this fact and that the majority of topics he has decided to tackle are not not limited to evolution I will change the debate title to "Creationism vs. Science" to better reflect what is being discussed.
Of course Nick did not give one peer reviewed reference to back up his claims, so I'll remind him of his agreement to do so during my opening statement. I also feel that it will be necessary to point out in my opening statement that he has now chosen the topics he wishes me to address and that responses should be limited to subjects brought up in my rebuttals and the topics of my opening statement.
Well, let the fun begin!
