For being 14, this guy is a genius. You better become a brain surgeon with all that knowledge you have, or at least a nuclear physicist.
" In fact, it specifically references the flu virus combining with animal virus"
Exactly, nothing NEW is added; only COMBINED.
"If so, I think we can move on to their arguments which seem to be statistical occurrence of bad mutations over good"
Which, in itself, is a good point. For example, if I took a bunch of gears, steel, plastic, and quartz and put it into a box and shook it for 1 billion years; it's not going to turn into a watch. That's what is called statistical impossibility.
And that is the thing. Evolution could NEVER happen. It is just too statistically impossible.
Supporting Evidence (since I don't know how to do it fancy at the bottom of the post ;)
http://www.icr.org/article/155/
http://www.answersingenesis.org/assets/
http://www.answersingenesis.
"I also like how you can't adequately explain your position, but you must defer to me reading a website."
Simple, you can't just say something, you have to back it up. If I say "My car can fly", I must prove to you that it does. Just because I say something doesn't mean it's true. Without proof words are meaningless.
Because criminals are never armed???
First you want to take away the public's guns. Now you want to take away guns from the police? It doesn't make sense.
I'm just glad my state has carry conceal. I don't need to rely on the police. ;)
"I presume that your referring primarily to the use of the term jihad in the Quran....etc. etc."
I suppose, but Islam is far more violent and over-reactive than Christianity. For example, turn on the news and watch as our ambassador gets violently killed over a movie trailer. Or Yahoo! search about how South Park made fun of Mohammad and Muslims were given permission to kill the writers of South Park if they met any. Christians never killed ambassadors because that country made a movie trailer making fun of Jesus. Nor did they threaten to kill the writers of South Park when they made fun of Jesus many times. So yes, I find that Islam is inherently violent.
"Moreover, you missed my primary point in bringing up the violence within Christianity and by Christianity towards others which is that very undemocratic practices have co-existed with Christianity and been justified in the name of Christianity by those who considered themselves to be Christians."
I don't think violence in itself makes a country "undemocratic". So just because there has been violence associated with Christianity doesn't make them "undemocratic". Second of all, my point was it was non-Christians persecuting true Christians. Because it was Church of England (a bunch of popes trying to get rich and powerful) persecuting Pilgrims (actual believers) I don't think the same principles apply. And I doubt that these corrupted religious leaders actually considered themselves to be Christian, so no; it was non-Christians using the name of Christianity to persecute actual Christians.
"Furthermore, literal and conservative interpretations of Christian doctrine deny equal freedoms to people based upon race (slavery), gender (rights of women), and sexual orientation (rights of homosexuals); these principles are in direct contradiction to the principles of a democratic society."
First of all, there is no where in the New Testament that states slavery is OK. Second, even the slavery mention in the Old Testament stated you had to free the slave after seven years of work giving him provision and funds necessary to make it on his own. Third, the "rights of women" argument is disputable. For example, some people (even atheists) argue that abortion kills children. And lastly, I argue that homosexuality is immoral, therefore shouldn't be a right. After all, laws against murder hinder someone's right to kill someone. As ridiculous as that example was, I hope you see my point in that you need a standard by which to back morality.
"You state that “not once is government affairs mixed in with Christianity (with the exception to obey your government)” which is flagrantly false. Christianity has a strong presence in U.S. government"
LOL, no silly. I don't mean that Christianity isn't mixed with government affairs, I mean that government affairs aren't mixed with Christianity. For example, the Bible doesn't give any instructions on how to run a country allowing man to set up a country any way he wants. The Bible doesn't tell you how to run a country, that's mans job. Our Founding Fathers set this up this country using Christian principals in order to maximize freedom. After all, you want to see how well a atheistic rooted country works? Go to Russia and see how well they have been doing.
"Again, thank you for being mature."
LOL. Don't thank me. Thank a combination of Markml0528 and Srom. I've been learning to be more mature/honest in my responses. Markml0528 especially has been teaching me a lot. ;)
"Islamic terrorists are just as much a part of Islam as Christian terrorists are a part of Christianity."
True, but here's my question.
The Bible does not say to kill anyone or commit any acts of terrorism for any reason whatsoever. The Quran explicitly states to kill and terrorize. So, since Christian terrorists are directly violating the Bible, should they literally be classified as Christian? I know they claim the name of Christian, but that doesn't actually make them Christian.
For example, I could change my profile to say I'm a Democrat. But if I don't follow the policy of the Democrat party; I'm not actually a Democrat.
Yes, you see, the website was having major problems when I made that post. To get an idea of how messed up CreateDebate was that night, see here:
I thought this guy was a pothead or something. Didn't we come to that conclusion in another debate?
Hell yes! There were so many cliques (or as I call them, cults) in my school that I actually wish they either working or something. They got bad grades, some of them flunked out, bullied other kids, and did atrocious acts to some of the girls. Those types of people don't deserve to go to school.
True, but name me one country that would have been pissed that we broke this treaty in this specific circumstance.
Like the news article said, Obama had just received his Noble Peace Prize (still trying to figure out what for). I think it was more of a political move than a practical one.
Yes, finally, I found someone on CreateDebate who understands morale absolutes. It seems like everyone on here is a moral relativist.
EDIT It should say SUPPORTED not Disputed! Darn website...
"for it contains no color. It only absorbs light."
So....you actually mean it contains all colors? White contains no colors because it reflects all colors. Black contains all colors because it absorbs all colors. If you took Red, Blue, Green, and Yellow paint, and mixed them together, you would get white?????? Of course not, you'd get black.
What you are thinking of is light in terms of production, not reflection. There's a difference, but not to worry. I've personally made this same mistake myself tons of times. ;)
So, technically, yes; white is the most pure color because it contains absolutely no colors at all.
HA HA HA! I wasn't necessarily trying to add credibility to my argument, I was merely showing that it has been done before, so I hit the "Clarify" button. LOL. That explains a lot.
But back to the subject, my original source was the Associated Press. I do not have time for archive searching at the moment, so on a quick Google search, here is a news website that also quotes it:
http://www.newser.com/story/89023/
Ah, I see. Well sorry for all of this confusion. I have changed my password into something more than just password101. And yes, sadly, that was my password. But not any longer. Thank you for helping me to clear this up.
But on a side note, like Youtube, Yahoo!, and other such websites, I do think down voting an argument enough makes it disappear; or at least censored. And since no permalink is added to an argument with the "Clarify" option, I can see how it can disappear without any trace.
"It says you down voted on your points history on your profile..."
Hmm...Maybe I should lock up my computer instead of leaving it on. Or change my CreateDebate password, because I don't remember doing that.
" Down voting an argument doesn't make it disappear."
But I've seen it happen twice. Once with Srom and once with Micmacmoc.
"You down voted one of my argument on this debate."
That wasn't me!!!!
"You down voted Nummi into negative 1. Here"
I supported his debate, why would I downvote???
"You also down voted BenWalters. Hos post also has zero points now."
Yeah, that was me all right. I admit to that. But he called me racist in that post, but don't worry about that; we have that settled now.
"This is a retarded way to down vote arguments. You want to down vote someone for having a good argument simply because you're jealous of how many points they have? If you're going to have this mentality, please grow up. Do not down vote simply because you're jealous of how many points they have. Down vote them if their argument fundamentally does not make sense, it is illogical, or if they're fabricating information."
Eh, I just don't want the post to "magically" disappear, so I make sure it has sufficient points before downvoting. UNLIKE YOU!!! In THIS debate, you helped spam down vote a post I had made that showed that the Russians used nukes FOUR times to stop oil spills. Guess you couldn't provide a rebuttal, so you down voted, and now the argument is disappeared. Real mature.
"First of all, I will ask for a source for that claim. Looking on CNN, I can find this article, which talks about the origins of the film. Now where does it attribute this the al Qaeda. Secondly, I found another article which said that the attacks in Libya were done by members of al Qaeda."
Here is where I found the claim. True it isn't probably a reliable source, but I just wanted to see the trailer not learn it's origins. I probably should have done better research.
"Finally, why the f@#k do I have religious prejudice?"
Here, this debate; it seems like you have a personal bias towards Muslims. Sorry for coming on a little strong there, but for reasons I don't want to make public, I got some beef with Muslims. So I apologize for overreacting.
I will agree to disagree for now, but we are getting into a whole different debate. I need to get back on track. Starting with this.
What? When? Are you sure one of my allies wasn't stalking me? Not all of my allies are listed on my page.
Maybe a problem with the HTML? Maybe Andy was working on the site and forgot to restore it?
Here is where the problem could be located?
Yeah, where's Andy? He's going to be in for a surprise when he wakes up in the morning.
