I've never been in a structured debate, so perhaps I'm misguided, but it seems like the moderator should've jumped in to remind Danny what the topic of the debate was. I don't think that would be unfair to Danny, I think not doing so is unfair to Matt and the audience.

2:03:23 You asked about more debate reviews like this one, absolutely yes. This was great. Keep them coming 👍

I cancelled my subscription to Modern Day Debates over the lack of control the mod showed. it wasnt a debate it was an attack.

I’ve been following Matt since ‘The Atheist Experience’ was in the old format. I would literally pause the video and look up words or arguments Matt used during the calls😂. I’ve learned so much from this guy. The knowledge I’ve gained has made me more confident whenever god is brought up, especially being that I’m black and live in GA. Matt, thanks for what you do. ✌🏾

Matt...first off, I was at this debate sitting in the second row and observed every second from an hour before the debate until long after it was over. You did a great job of not letting Daniel control and mislead the room. Despite being there in person, I HIGHLY appreciate this new format for debate review...getting to hear your opponents actual words, tone, etc really enhances your breakdowns.

I personally don’t consider this a debate because it was so one sided. The annoyance factor with Matt’s opponent was difficult to endure.

Thanks Daniel. My TV stopped working and the repair guy is on holiday but now I realise I don't need his analytical thinking, I'll take the back off and use my far superior intuition. If that doesn't work I'll pray.

Thank you for taking the time to do these debate analyses: looking back over how an argument develops (or goes off the rails) is a very useful way to develop critical thinking skills.

I always appreciated the earliest debate reviews you did where you are showing clips and then responding directly. I don't care that it may be longer, from a viewer perspective. I fully understand there may be increased time and effort on your part and wouldn't fault you for trying to make the most use of your personal time. I just think reviews are so much more effective and educational with a clip of the context accompanying the review. On my end, it means nothing if that makes a 30 minute review sans context, turn into two hours.

Daniel is an insufferable fool.

There really is something profoundly stupid about a man raging against progress from behind 2 laptops

Matt, this has to be the BEST debate review of yours that i have seen. Please continue with them, i think it is very informative.

[Currently at the beginning of this video] I have a degree in physics, and a couple of my physics professors in college talked about 'training our intuition' about how certain things worked, posing questions without much information aside from our understanding of the underlying mechanics. 'Intuition,' in my training, is about exposure and understanding of underlying principals, NOT some universal understanding given from on-high. So in that way, one's 'intuition' is only as good as one's education and experience. Which...I suppose tells us something about this guy's reliance upon intuition in his argument.

This is an excellent format for debate reviews, it's great getting to see the debate in real time with your commentary, great new format!

I enjoyed the extended breakdown.

I love this review style it lets us see the debate and get Matt's thought process through the whole thing. Hopefully he keeps this style

As someone who grew up muslim, I dont blame anyone if they chose to become a total islamophobe after a conversation with danny pikachu

This is a great format, Matt! Please continue! 🎉

Love this style Matt! Would love to see more videos like this 👍

Thanks for making this. These reviews are appreciated.

I love these debate reviews. I learn more from them than the debates themselves which often just have me raging at the screen.

Matt I really love this long version, reaction style review of your debates! Definitely do more like this in the future!

Keep up the good work Matt, we love it!!

This format of review is very informative for me, and I enjoy long form stuff anyway! Would love to see more. I’m actually stunned at how confused and distorted Daniel’s understanding of the world is. Thanks for breaking it all down for us.

YES!!! Do THIS style all the time!!!

This format is really nice. I'm sure it's a ton of work but I definitely appreciate it

i like this format where you show the video 👍👍 keep up the great work

I prefer this debate review style, Matt. More of this, please.

"My argument can't stand up to analysis, therefore analysis is bad."

Daniel is exhausting. It's good to see a full breakdown of the debate cutting through his constant diversions and dishonesty. He said nothing substantive and his whole position, based on his statements later in the debate (apologies for jumping ahead), demonstrate that he doesn't even care if Islam is true, he just wants a religion (any religion, doesn't matter which) to use as a cudgel to enforce an ultra conservative, repressive society on everyone. I'm looking forward to Matt tackling the bit where Daniel asserts that secular humanism is responsible for the gulf war.

As long as you are willing and able to put the necessary (and considerable) effort into it, I prefer this longer review style. But I'll take whatever you put up.

Thank you, Matt, for this good 2-hour-long New Year's gift. I liked the videos in the format you did before, and I'll be happy to listen to them in this format as well.

Terrific video and analysis! ✌️ Please keep this format when plausible 👏👏👏

Yes, I enjoy this style of breaking down the debate with your commentary and explication. Looking forward to part 3.

I appreciate the long format review and content. The MDD debate format is extremely frustrating (not expecting any surprises there) as a listener, when unmoderated off-topic blithering swamps the content, so the clarification and reactions are satisfying. Keep doing what you're doing and I look forward to your crew providing a reasonable alternate platform for debates in whatever form they take.

I prefer this style of review because it helps me remember who the person was that you debated and what they said. Also it covers you against false accusations of you saying something about a person you debated that wasnt true. I also like that it can give you a chance to expand upon something you said in the debate.

This format is so much better than not having the clips

Oh wow, a 2 hour video! I am excited for this one!

Happy new year everyone ❤😍🥰😊💕💗

Matt, I truly do not blame you for walking away from Modern Day Debates. Guests such as your opponent here demonstrate (to my eyes) their preference for mere spectacle than reasoned discussion.

I’ve been watching your content for MANY years and I absolutely LOVED this long form debate analysis for opponents who do not debate in good faith like this.

Another plus one vote for the debate reviews with clips. However echoing what an earlier commenter has said, completely understandable that the time and effort it takes to make this kind of vid vs your other debate reviews may not be desirable for you. Would choose the shorter vids over no vids, thats for sure.

Loved this format sooo much. Watching along and having each point dissected is so helpful and interesting.

Finally we have the part 2!!

You have my sincerest applause for not walking out of that debate. His level of intellectual dishonesty and smugness is making me angry two screens removed. I can't imagine how you sat through that in person.

I find that close analysis quite interesting. I like that format.

You asked about more debate reviews like this one, absolutely yes. This was great. Keep them coming i liked this format especially after watching some of original debate .

Great breakdown format. Cant wait for the other parts.

Speeding it up 25% makes Daniel 25% more infuriating. It's the Ben Shapiro Effect.

Also, addressing each point is incredibly valuable. I hope you can find the time and energy to finish the rest of the review. We really appreciate it.

I'm sorry to be late commenting, but I LOVE the extended review format. I like the deep dives and the detailed explanations of what happened and why. As a side note, Matt at 1.5 speed is INTENSE! 😊

Thanks for the blow by blow on this debate. I highly recommend you continue to do debate reviews like this as it shows the holes in their debate in real time. Probably takes you a lot longer but your viewers will thank you over and over.

I like this format, Matt. I like hearing your thoughts as the debate is going on. Thank you for this.

I love this type of review, having the examples of parts of the debate that you're breaking down makes everything so clear.

Yes we like this way at least we can see what the opposition is saying rather than just summarizing

Hey Matt - I think that this form of debate review is awesome! Definitely more engaging and interesting to watch as a viewer, and laying out the actual debate video for analysis is much clearer. Cheers!

Hats of for your patience

For what it's worth, I much more enjoy the long review format addressing points from the video. I feel it adds to clarification and saves having to rewatch a long debate and search for the specific points addressed to refer to.

I'm a fan of this format where you show the debate and then comment and expand on it, especially since I haven't rewatched the debate since it was originally posted.

I like the new format. Long time fan too love your work mate

I love this breakdown of your debates Matt. Its a lot but well worth it. Thank you

Really appreciate these breakdowns Matt, it allows people to consider and better understand the ideas and rebuttals you have put forward, without these clowns shouting over you.

I absolutely prefer this debate review format. Especially when the debate you are speaking about happened quite a long time ago.

I'm only 14 minutes in but I need to sleep. Looking forward to watching the rest. Happy New Year, Matt!

I really enjoy this style. Thanks for doing them!

This format is really interesting! I learn a lot more, so please keep it up! 😊👍

"The theist is always at a disadvantage if he has to mold his arguments to satisfy a mind that's primed to reject anything that's not empirical" - Daniel Haqiqatjou Well said, Daniel. Let's prime more minds to be skeptical and committed to relying on empirical evidence when assessing extraordinary claims.

This method of review brings the context of the debate into your review as you're giving it. It lets those that don't want to support the channel for the various things that have happened on it see the context. It also reminds those that saw the debate live without having to rewatch it and therefore contribute to the channel more they want to. Mind you, I have a bias for liking this debunking style of presentation (Viced Rhino being one of my favorite channels). I see this only as a supplement to your usual style of review seeing as removing the video playback pretty much doesn't change the substance at all (obviously some minor sentence transitions would need slight tweaking).

This is wild. Daniel is portraying analytic thinking as some plague that a dominating society forcefully applies to other people. So oppressive! That's a new one.

I absolutely loved this debate review. Thank you Matt for taking the time.

I love this format! It helped me to understand your thought processes. Thank you.

I figure what you've been doing works well in most cases, but this one is a special occasion. I prefer this method (re-watch, pause, comment) for an event as awful as this one. There have been multiple debate reviews that I felt I truly didn't need to have seen the debate (which I had seen before the review).

The long anticipated video! Can't wait!

It still boggles my mind how adults can defend fairy tails made up by ancient people that had no idea how the world worked at the time. Thanks Matt, it's great seeing these vids from you!

Thank you for breaking this debate up and adding commentary. I did not and would not have watched the debate, as I find most debates of little value. Your analysis of the debate, however, I find invaluable. Keep up the great work!

This debate deserved the deep dive method and worked really well. Awesome stuff ✌️

Very interesting and very clerifying! I actually like yout reviews better than the actual debates.

I like this new format. Despite it being longer, it's much more useful to someone like me who may not have time to seek out and watch all the debates on different platforms/channels, but am interested in seeing the analyses on this channel. It's a good way to kill two birds with one stone. Long format stuff isn't necessarily bad either when you need something to listen to in the background.

I really enjoyed the long form breakdown. Would love to see more like it

Absolutely want more of these long form reviews. Love them. It’s interesting to see your thoughts on specific points. I’ve wondered that before with things like your Ray Comfort “Debate”, or your Sye Ten Bruggencate and Matt clips vs. Matt Dillahunty debate.

Thank you Matt for an excellent master class , in how use critical thinking, especially in of irrational resistance.

Although it was tough to get through, I enjoyed this long form analysis because you were able to discuss so many facets of epistemology and foundations of logic. I don’t know how you didn’t get sick of answering the same question over and over in the debate and then having to explain it over and over in the review. But kudos for that.

Unlike some people I appreciate the wait from part one to part two, it deserves a lot of time and care put into it to properly examine 💜💜💜

Thank you for this. Love it

Kudos to you, Matt, for withstanding these types of people. What I've seen from many of your debates is essentially two lines of attack they take. 1. They bring up some philosophical mumbo jumbo instead of presenting evidence. 2. They do what this guy did and try to poison the well on science instead of presenting evidence. If people believe and come to a debate that asks them to PRESENT EVIDENCE, the moment that it is clear they don't do that is the moment the moderator should step in and shut things down. I applaud you walking out of other debates in those instances, but James the moderator is a weakling and useless.

This format of breaking down the debate points is excellent and affords the extra elaboration they needed. Commiserations on having to suffer the protracted ignorance of your Gobshite interlocutor in this instance, which is par for the course with Haquacqanchew. Sending a big happy new year to you and yours Matt, from Dublin, Ireland 👍.

On the topic of this vs shorter format debate reviews Pros: - More in-depth analysis. You naturally have more to say when going through the debate with us as opposed to going off of memory or notes, some of which is occurring to you for the first time meaning we get more reflection over all. - The subject of your comments is paired in time with the comments themselves. Rather than taking on faith your description (or interpretation) of the events or having to watch the debate separately, we can immediately see what in the debate prompted your comment. - The structure of the review matches the structure of the debate. This may be a minor pro that does not affect everyone, but it does help me associate the comment with the moment when the debate is reviewed chronologically. I don't remember any instances of you jumping wildly around in time when reviewing debates in the past, certainly not that caused me any issue in following the review, but I do appreciate the extra enforcement of structure in this format. Cons: - More Pikachu (and the health risks associated with it) - It's more effort for you to watch it once to take notes and a second time with us during the review Overall, I think this format offers better explanatory power and more numerous and effective instances of teaching, but I can't in good conscious request that you subject yourself and the rest of us to more headaches. If you decide of your own volition to continue in this format, you have my support.

I really enjoy this type of commentary, it helps better understand your positions

I like the reviews more than the debates. Mostly because I watch them to try and educate myself on understanding arguments better. Hearing you explain certain aspects of the debates even when clarifying your own statements makes it helpful for me in the future, not even for just "god" debates but others too. Thanks Matt. Keep fighting the good fight. ❤❤

He wasn't there to debate. He was there to argue.

I like the content please keep it coming in this form. It helps me understand my own thoughts better than just the initial debate being had that often leaves me lacking because of previous lack of education on the topic. This fills in those gaps very pleasantly.

YES- I like this format of video, a lot

I have no idea why they think it's a good idea to argue from a position that "we should lower the bar of evidence required to accept these claims!" That's...like...the *_*opposite*_* of what you should be saying if you're talking to/about people who are already skeptical of what you're selling. Just in his opening statement he keeps saying that certain beliefs/ideas are "universally shared" as if that's not anything more than a bald-faced assertion. One that's probably trivially easy to dismiss if he actually tried to give specifics. Because at that point all you'd have to do is point to one culture that *_*didn't*_* hold to those ideas and...there goes that.

“I’ve watched people sleep” - Matt Dillahunty.

"I skipped it so you don't have to spend two hours here" - proceeds to record two hour video :D Great content Matt! I've learned a lot from you and this content is exactly what I'm looking for!

I loved the play by play analysis, Matt, especially when your opponent is “Gish-ing” all over himself. Demonstrating each fallacy not only helps to identify when someone I am debating commits that error, but also helps in preventing me from commiting that same error. In the last 15 years, your words have helped me tremendously in adopting a more skeptical approach to understanding the world and my life is demonstrably better for them. My vote is for the longer format and a sincere thanks for all of your efforts.

I love when apologists complain that they can't defend their positions in accordance with the best standards of evidence and reasoning, and then act like this is a grave injustice foisted upon them. "Well _of course_ I can't provide evidence, and how dare you ask me for such!!" It would be like a high school basketball team playing the Denver Nuggets and complaining when the Nuggets insist that points count only when the ball goes through the rim. "Well _of course_ we can't score if we actually have to put the ball _through_ the rim, and how dare you as us for such!!" The apologist is basically challenging the atheist to a basketball game and demanding to be rewarded points just for _attempting_ a shot.

Ironically Daniel was using analytic "thinking" to push for his intuition argument. Lol

Daniel is incredible dishonest. I couldn't stand how he argued Matt can't prove harming someone is wrong when in a previous debate he was provided multiple studies that child marriage is harmful to the child and in the same debate kept saying there is no evidence that its harmful. Pure dishonesty.

I find the debate analysis much more interesting than the debate itself. 😊