Another reason, or at least why enjoy the debates, is that it becomes evident that the responses from apologists are cut'n'paste from the Brooklyn books. There is no; debate, understanding of the others point of view, or a challenge of ones own beliefs. They will NEVER put their own opinion on the chopping block. With these automatic responses it becomes clear to some that as a member of a high control group you are required to respond to challenges with what is written in the societies literature. There is no personal reasoning or using your own brain. When AlanF throws up comments like 'brain-dead', well, they are.
In the 'Gentile Times' debate(sic.) the title suggests that ONLY the bible should be used to prove / disprove the 607/1914 doctrine. Any intelligent person would know that from the outset this is impossible as the bible contains no dates, and as thus can not be either proved or disproved using the bible alone. After each point of the discussion had been thrown about for 20 or so pages I would respond, using only the bible, and I would not get a reply. That says volumes to Jehovah's Witness lurkers.
And, ultimately what is most important, is that no matter how hard apologists try, in the end, they will always fail when it comes to defending the Watchtower's stance on anything which is watchtower policy over bible policy. Always.
These debates show this.
steve
PS, if anyone disagrees with what I've said here, I will respond be pasting this again in its entirety, and in part, and then say 'I've won', stick my fingers in my ears, and go out on the field service looking for some more sales people.