- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Haha, I like you man...but you're crazy!
If you could read you'd understand that the person I was replying to listed their 'kitchen cabinet' website as 'evidence' (which incidentally is as fit for purpose as any other evidence you bible bashers have)
the bibole tells you how to escape eternal hell, torture, death?
We're not going to escape anything. When we die, we go stiff, start to decay then we'll be buried or burned. You might not like the sound of it but that's it. Plain and simple. No eternal hell, no torture. You will not 'escape death'. No heaven, no 72 virgins, nothing.
Sorry, but if you can accept that as the most likely truth you'll enjoy your 70-90 years alive much much more.
What are you talking about?
Kitchen cabinats weren't inventrd, dumbo
read that back...what is the relevance of that statement?
The person I'd originally replied to goes around making tiny inutile contributions to debates and posts a link to their kitchen website as 'evidence'. That's what I was referring to.
luv the christadelphian bitch
wow, I'm really intimidated by a jebus loving gimp.
I believe you just made up that I believe in 'God day.'
Wouldn't it be ridiculous to just make up something someone believes in...plucked from thin air!!...some might even say the whole concept is 'stupid'!! bet AuntieChrist feels like a fool for assuming your beliefs would be founded on nothing!
Haha, this is a hilariously bad riposte! It seems Aveskde, AuntieChrist and RiceDaragh have pretty much summed up everything I would have wanted to say so I'll leave it in their capable hands.
you are the sick-minded, selfish, uncaring, ungracious, un-everything god on this planet, person I have ever known or heard of.
I don't see how I'm sick minded, selfish, uncaring and ungracious, simply because I refuse to subscribe to your delusions. You don't know me at all.
you are the only person so far I can actually hate with a passion
Cool. How 'christian' of you. How caring and 'forgiving'. Love thy neighbour and all that crap? What have I done to hurt you, your family, your friends...or anybody? I couldn't give a shit if you hate me or not, why not waste some time by praying for my demise...I won't lose any sleep about what your imaginary friend will do to me.
It pleases me that my contempt for your absurd beliefs angers you so much. It makes me think that deep down you know I'm right but you don't want to upset mommy and daddy by confronting them for indoctrinating you. Grow a brain or some balls, douchebag.
I know, it was a bad ending. I had to go eat some dinner.
haha, fair enough.
I don't point out anything religious. I just don't want you calling me a Jesus Freak as an argument or assumption.
The majority of people who argue against evolution are proponents of creationism, which I will admit, does rile me. I'm not implying that you are a 'Jesus-freak' and I get the feeling we're arguing the same point here. I'm saying that theory and fact are almost the same thing in science, and you're saying that scientific findings are 'theory' by definition. We don't really disagree, I just don't want the fact that the term 'theory' is used to become part of a creationists arsenal. I wanted to make it clear that the scientific use of the term 'theory' isn't the same as the colloquial 'theory'.
You can only declare anything a fact when it is beyond doubt, especially when you look at time from an end-of-time perspective.
I'm sure most biologists would argue that evolution is beyond doubt but I get what you mean. The reason I'm arguing against you is I feel that the vast majority of opponents to evolution on this website are fervent creationists, and I don't want the fact that evolution is a 'theory' (in scientific literals), to be hijacked by the god-brigade as an argument against logic.
I was merely making the argument from the start that the Theory of Evolution was Theory IN NAME ALONE and giving some debatable points to make on why its still considered such and Not the "Fact of Evolution.
I completely agree with you. The only thing I would want to add is that the term 'theory' in science, is the closest thing to 'fact' that any scientific proposal can ever become.
I'm not trying to mislead anyone, I'm making a statement that was supposed to be somewhat funny because THERE IS NO ARGUMENT TO BE MADE EXCEPT THAT EVOLUTION IS SCIENTIFICALLY ACCEPTED.
and you are right, and as I said it is a stupid and leading question. I didn't really think you were trying to mislead anyone. I more just felt that your argument could be misinterpreted to undervalue the findings of evolution.
Throughout you're argument you state a multitude of supposed Absolutes, such as the last sentence in your second section. Both of these statements are assumptions of Bible-Blabbing and extreme-ism and are both not true nor very appreciated.
Having read both of them back it sounds like I was directing those statements at you personally, but it was meant to be in a general sense. I'd debated the topic with someone else recently and I must admit I might have confused yourself with them. I had thought that you were a pseudoscientist closet creationist at first, so apologies for that!
Merely a suggestion on my part, but you should adjust your arguments to be comparative and more, err, comprimisable in the sense that you are right but don't wish to necessarily insult everything your opponent sees.
Haha, taken on board. The problem for me is that I have no room for compromise on 'creationism vs evolution'...which is usually what these thing are about (even though I know that's not the case with yourself). I do agree that I should try to limit just insulting peoples perspective, for doing so I apologise. I try to focus on respectful debate, but on occasion I feel I want to highlight absurdities in peoples perspective and to joke about the topic is sometimes quite effective, however it often reduces the debate into ineffective ridicule. I appreciate that in your case (bearing in mind the mistaken identity) it wasn't fair or accurate, so genuine apologies.
Nobody cares where your from or 'how much' of an American you are.
Turns out we were calling it football before Columbus had even set sail, so you don't have much of a right to "hate it".
You don't really have much of a point. Are you saying that you prefer handegg to football because we call it football and you want to call handegg football? That's not really a justification for why you prefer the sport.
I agree with you on overstepping the boundaries from protection to intrusion, but I have to say that the threat of terrorism isn't unproven. 9/11 aside, there have been an abundance of terrorist attacks and attempts around the world in the last 10 years. While I appreciate that the threat has maybe been exaggerated, it certainly exists.
We all know about the man who tried to exterminate an entire ethnoreligious group of people and directly initiated the deadliest conflict ever, a global conflict resulting in the deaths of over 70 million people ...but did he always get a round of beers in? Did he let Eva Braun hold the remote control?
He could have personally given everyone in western Europe a footrub to try to make up for it and he'd still be a douchebag...so no, he couldn't have been a good man.
I hope you say religious in non-theist terminology.
I say 'religious agenda' meaning the disregard of overwhelming supporting evidence of evolution simply because it contradicts the idea that god created everything by clicking his fingers a few times over six days.
I still adhere to THEORY seeing as thats what they are all titled as.
As I already explained evolution is both theory and fact. That they use the term theory does NOT imply that it might be wrong. I've never heard anyone question gravity...never. To adopt a sentence you actually used, if I was to say "It is not a fact, by the way, as you cannot actually prove Gravity"...I'd be ridiculed. It would be stupid. I could claim that if I drop this ball how can you say for certain it will fall to the ground? Without my dropping it you cannot prove it, but based on repeated observations and overwhelming evidence it is, obviously, fact.
It is the exact same with evolution, a wealth of evidence and observations of evolution actually happening...but there's still people who deny it....and it is blatantly all down to religion.
Nothing(more or less) has definitive proof
I know what you are trying to say but to deny that evolution is a fact is like saying that gravity isn't a fact. While they are both known as 'theories' in the scientific sense, they are repeatedly observed and with a massive amount of supporting evidence they are overwhelmingly agreed upon by the scientific community. By overemphasising the importance of the title "the theory of evolution" when discussing it (especially among non-scientists)..you are blatantly seeking to mislead.
If Evolution was a fact, then why did this man post this debate to begin with? Ill leave you on that nice little note.
That 'nice little note' is probably the most hilariously bad riposte I've ever seen.
If evolution was clearly just a theory then why did he post it? People post stupid or leading questions all the time. In this case it is obvious that the person who posted this debate has a religious agenda. Evolution contradicts what his crazy, unfounded, old book says, that's why.
If you understand the concept that theory and fact are almost the same thing in science then you would accept evolution. I struggle to think of any reason anyone could deny it without religious influence.
I am an atheist and get what you mean with that skin crawling feeling when saying "I know"...
I wouldn't deny that there might be a god...but I would say that I am 99.99999% sure there isn't.
With any other absurd premise, I cannot declare that it definitely isn't true. You can say you have a pet dragon in your garden, but without coming and seeing for myself I can never be 100% sure you're insane...almost sure, but not 100%.
uuurgh, another debater with a religious agenda posing as someone with scientific knowledge but spouting nothing but pseudoscience.
EVOLUTION isn't supported at all.
absolute nonsense. It pains me to even reply to a statement like this.
there needs to be a crazy above fifty percent mutation rate
..and here was me thinking you understood evolution.
From your other post I thought that you understood the term 'theory' in the scientific sense. In the colloquial sense, theory means 'speculation' or 'opinion; in the scientific sense a theory must be based on observed facts and make testable predictions. In science, a current theory is a theory that has no equally acceptable or more acceptable alternative theory. Evolution is a theory and fact in the same way that you having a nose on your face is theory and fact.
The statement "evolution is both a theory and a fact" is often seen in biological literature. Evolution is a "theory" in the scientific sense of the term "theory"; it is an established scientific model that explains observations and makes predictions through mechanisms such as natural selection.
When scientists say "evolution is a fact", they are using one of two meanings of the word "fact". One meaning is empirical: evolution can be observed through changes in allele frequencies or traits of a population over successive generations.
Another way "fact" is used is to refer to a certain kind of theory, one that has been so powerful and productive for such a long time that it is universally accepted by scientists. When scientists say evolution is a fact in this sense, they mean it is a fact that all living organisms have descended from a common ancestor (or ancestral gene pool) even though this cannot be directly observed. This implies more tangibly that it is a fact that humans share a common ancestor with other primates.
You sound like you understand why the term 'theory' is used...which makes me think you know that being infinitely evidenced makes it as much a fact as it can ever be! Evolution is both theory and fact. Why mislead people by stating that it anything but? If working on that basis we can argue that gravitational theory isn't fact, but in the more practical sense of the word, it is clearly 'fact'..nobody would even question it without some religious agenda.
Did you mean 'of course'? It's just strange because E and U are quite far from one another on a keyboard.
Do you know what 'coerce' means? It turns out it's more relevant than you think when talking about religion.
Again with the kitchen cabinet rubbish, you can't be much of a business person. If your trying to get backlinks, that's not how SEO works. If you're hoping people will cold click on your link randomly and happen to buy a kitchen from you then your wasting your time, the odds are literally in the millions.
What a fucking cunt
...that's about the most sensible thing you've said.
Don't even think of debating on my level till you read what I've written.
Saying that you really, really, really feel like your imaginary friend is in the room with you doesn't cut it...especially on a debating site.
That the way to do it!... If you don't understand something, or cannot accept that something is as yet still unknown...simplify!! Dumb it down! A big man in the sky with a beard waved a magic wand and ping..universe is ready! having a god of the gaps is great isn't it!