CreateDebate


Pizzakitty's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of Pizzakitty's arguments, looking across every debate.
1 point

Please stop quoting out of context: it is a form of lying, and, as you put it, a dishonest debate gets us nowhere.

1 point

It's in CNN, you mean. A liberal news source. Who can you trust? Both sides are screaming "FAKE NEWS!" at the top of their lungs.

1 point

It's not even possible to be a "liberal-leaning centrist", the definition of centrist is that you do not take a side.

1 point

"The conservatives are against free thought" says the group boasting violent protesters just to keep us from speaking our different ideas; says the group that wants to arrest us for "hate crimes" that are actually a matter of opinion. No, science is liberal because it is not open to any school of thought besides that of the liberals.

1 point

Science is not a left wing study, the people running it are just left wingers. In order to be scientists, they get a degree from a left wing university (you can tell because all the protests are on different campuses, which also happen to provide "safe spaces").

1 point

Trump could not have leaked confidential information as he did not have access to it before the election. Making deals with them was not a crime because during the election he was a private citizen. He was no friend of the Russians as you can see from the worst U.S.- Russia relations since the Cuban Missile Crisis. As for him destroying unity and care for fellow Americans, that is also incorrect. People like the protesters are destroying unity with their left wing ideas getting more and more radical by the minute and immigrants with allegiances to different countries. If you were talking about the Affordable Care Act when you said "care for fellow Americans", that is just a method of getting votes. Immigrants come in, get free health care, and therefore vote for the people who support it. Health care would be great if there was no free immigration, or vise versa. He is not a tragedy, he is the greatest success since Ronald Regan.

1 point

I have also found that even when I present evidence right under the noses of Atheists, they turn it down. I also present some evidence that they usually just say is a jumbled up mix of nonsense but here we go...

The second law of thermodynamics says that when energy changes from one form to another form, or matter moves freely, entropy (disorder) increases. Apply that to your chemical soup, and you find that when all your chemicals are mixing together, they get more random instead of orderly.

Who's hoping for miracles, again?

In case you were thinking of the Infinite Monkey Theorem, let's calculate the chances of that. There is 1/26 of a chance that the monkeys will get the first letter right. Then there is 1/(26*26) chance they will get the second letter right, or twenty six to the second power. With every character going up one exponent, then it ends up 1/26 to the power of 3695990 of a chance. Some chromosomes have about two hundred million nucleotides. The chance of that coming from nothing is (because there are four types of nucleotides) 1/(4 to the power of 200000000) That's not to mention the second law of thermodynamics or the fact that nucleotides do not form by themselves. All of this put together would quite literally bring the probability down to nothing. Oh, and I just wanted to show you the numbers just so you could get the picture. In the link there are some scientists who agree with me.

Supporting Evidence: Royal Society Verdict (www.evolutionnews.org)
1 point

This does not relate to the argument. Why does it have two points???

1 point

This is a difficult topic...

If he did not let all these things happen (all these things, by the way, are the devil's doing, not his), the everyone would know he existed. If everyone knew he was real, the choice to follow him would not be theirs, because they would just choose him in order not to go to hell. The choice would be to obvious, and we would not really choose him of our free will. He does not want to wreck the dignity he gave us through free will and intelligence.

1 point

God is real, life would not be possible without him. The second law of thermodynamics says that when energy changes from one form to another form, or matter moves freely, entropy (disorder) increases. Apply that to your chemical soup, and you find that when all your chemicals are mixing together, they get more random instead of orderly.

Who's hoping for miracles, again?

In case you were thinking of the Infinite Monkey Theorem, let's calculate the chances of that. There is 1/26 of a chance that the monkeys will get the first letter right. Then there is 1/(26*26) chance they will get the second letter right, or twenty six to the second power. With every character going up one exponent, then it ends up 1/(26 to the power of 3695990) of a chance. Some chromosomes have about two hundred million nucleotides. The chance of that coming from nothing is (because there are four types of nucleotides) 1/(4 to the power 200000000) That's not to mention the second law of thermodynamics or the fact that nucleotides do not form by themselves. All of this put together would quite literally bring the probability down to nothing. Oh, and I just wanted to show you the numbers just so you could get the picture. There are some scientists who agree with me in the link.

Supporting Evidence: Royal Society Verdict (www.evolutionnews.org)
1 point

I am tired of all this debating, it is sad that you have to cut parts of my sentences in order to get your point across. If that is the only way you can debate, then your point is not valid, or else you would use it. If you wish to keep debating, I have an argument ready, but I am going to hand over the verdict to the Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge, one of the leading authorities in science for about four hundred fifty years.

Supporting Evidence: Royal Society Verdict (www.evolutionnews.org)
1 point

Please see the revised version underneath, I am new to the website and accidentally made another comment.

1 point

If the only theory of the beginnings of life was evolution, yes, my logic would be screwed up, but remember that the theory you are speaking of is not the only theory out there. The logic of the theory of evolution is screwed up, not mine. And if you want to prove otherwise, you actually need to find out what is wrong with my logic.

1 point

To answer that question, you just say "we don't really know yet"...

1 point

Yes, and Hillary would have been too.The left wing says Trump is a Nazi, but who imposed gun control to prevent revolts? Hitler. Who supported protests against a certain group that would eventually get violent? Hitler. Who wanted a strong world government? Hitler. Get what I am saying here?

0 points

Your first argument: Yes, it says we evolved from other animals, who evolved from yet others, who evolved from yet others, who evolved from chemicals. Please note my other argument (4th from the top). The Bible does not teach that man evolved from nothing, because if you gather enough dirt and transmute its elements into the ones you need for life and put them in the place needed, life is created from dirt (by the way, who is talking? The person who believes time, physics, space, matter and everything came from nothing by accident?).

Your second argument: Correct, Atheism is a straw man fallacy as well as an unproved theory, the argument side of it addresses Christianity and related religions as cults having no evidence for their argument whatsoever, which is untrue.

Your third argument: See my first statement.

Your fourth argument: Forgive me from being unclear. The belief that God exists is the basis of the intricate beliefs of Christianity and like religions. The belief that no god exists is the basis of the intricate beliefs of Atheists. You cannot prove that there is no God as much as I can prove that there is a God. We can both give evidence, but currently there is no proof for either of our sides. Atheism is as much a religion as Christianity.

Your fifth answer relies on your earlier ones, my other responses will also suffice for this statement.

1 point

Transgender is not wrong or right, just it is not for everyone. It is not angelic as the left wing is making it out to be (for votes (different story)), but you cannot judge trans. people for their actions, some people are just born with a mindset that just does not the gender of their body.

2 points

The second law of thermodynamics says that when energy changes from one form to another form, or matter moves freely, entropy (disorder) increases. " Apply that to your chemical soup, and you find that when all your chemicals are mixing together, they get more random instead of orderly.

Who's hoping for miracles, again?

1 point

Disputes are shown on the side that they dispute, it is how the website is coded.

1 point

That is a good idea, but Palestine would be back in another few years demanding more land and claiming it was theirs.

1 point

They were kind of deported by the Babylonians, and therefore it is not their fault that they left the land at all. If it was actually their choice, they would have stuck with the land, as they think it was given to them by their God.

1 point

Yes, they do, and it is just a plot for votes. When the immigrants (legal or not) come streaming in, liberals give them free health care, therefore the immigrants vote for them. THE LIBERALS DO NOT CARE IF SOME POOR SOUL OUT THERE CAN'T PAY FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES, THEY JUST WANT POWER!!

1 point

No, for several reasons:

Our first example is not an example at all but pure reason. If you were going up against a murderer coming running at your family and you with a knife, would you rather have a gun or your bare hands to defend yourself? Gun control is a law to regulate citizen guns, but do criminals follow the law? So now let’s say he’s running at you with a gun. Would you rather have a gun or your bare hands? Oh, wait- all your guns are gone due to gun control. Sorry.

Now for an actual example: Rome! The fall of Rome was due to many things, but one above all: the Roman citizens didn’t have weapons. They had grown rich enough that they just hired mercenaries to defend themselves. So when the Visigoths defeated the mercenaries, there was nothing the Romans could do. They just ran. But stay tuned: there’s more!

Fast forward one thousand five hundred years or so: World War Two. The Japanese are thinking that they may be able to invade America. They hold a council of war. When they introduced the idea, commander-in-chief Isoroku Yamamoto (the guy who planned the pearl harbor attack) just laughed and said that there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass ( as the army it was in North Africa at the time). Even with the Japanese army, they did not invade America. It was not the only prevented invasion in World War Two. For example, Operation Tannenbaum.

Operation Tannenbaum was an effort to get Switzerland under control of the Axis (the alliance of Germany, Italy, and Japan). It was operated between September twenty fifth, nineteen forty and nineteen forty four. The final goal of the operation was to invade Switzerland, but was cancelled. All that gold, and he didn’t try to invade- because at that time, every man was equipped with a machine gun.

1 point

If the only way you can shoot down other's arguments is by calling them pathetic, your argument has no validity (or you would be using it). We are not ignorant fools and anyone can tell because you (well, Liberals in general) keep having to shut us up to keep us from destroying your argument, and we use the facts and you don't (if you want proof of this, I can write a one page long article destroying your gun control argument).


1 of 2 Pages: Next >>

Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]