SPOTLIGHT SERIES - ChuckHades
This is the Fifteenth in an ongoing series of spotlight debates. The purpose of the debate is to "roast" the user (and when I say "roast", I mean in a nice way). Please share all the good, humorous, and otherwise positive aspects about this important user of our community. Don't worry, I will be creating one of these every few days so your name may show up next!
ChuckHade's Profile - http://www.createdebate.com/user/viewprofile/ChuckHades
Fourteenth in the series - Srom1883 - http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/SPOTLIGHT_SERIES_Srom1883
Sixteenth in the series - johnbonham32 - http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/SPOTLIGHT_SERIES_Johnbonham32
He joined a few weeks after I did, and I've always been impressed with his level of debating, scientific knowledge, and eagerness to discuss interesting ideas. All made the more impressive by his young age (15, I think, now).
He's one of the few people I trust to have a rational input on most debates - I've logged in a few times just to see his name on every debate I clicked on. He also loves a good joke, and the occasional presidential election (of himself, that is).
One of the most solid debaters on this site. I'm always interested in what he has to say, especially when he disputes what I'm saying because I know I can count on a level-headed and well thought out point that I perhaps hadn't considered before. All of this is made more impressive by his youth.
Chuckie chuck chuck...what to say?
Probably one of the most intelligent users. Witty, smart, clever. A careful pragmatist.
If he has an intellectual flaw, it is that he either insincerely misrepresents his beliefs on issues where he deviates from the position one assumes he would take or he is attempting to justify a position he does not logically believe solely for the sake of holding it. Such a case is a rarity, though.
An atheist. A thinker. Perhaps one day even a dreamer.
If he has an intellectual flaw, it is that he either insincerely misrepresents his beliefs on issues where he deviates from the position one assumes he would take or he is attempting to justify a position he does not logically believe solely for the sake of holding it.
I think most of the time that's just devil's advocate, tbh. I'd get very bored very quickly debating the same positions over and over.
But, cheers :)