CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:189
Arguments:285
Total Votes:195
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Contest: for those of you who hate evolution (183)

Debate Creator

ghostheadX(1084) pic



Contest: for those of you who hate evolution

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/10/29/pope-francis-may-believe-in-evolution-but-42-percent-of-americans-do-not/

Without using a citation from the Christian Bible, the Satanic Bible, or any religious text, I challenge anyone here, including FromWithin to provide an article or interview with the Pope where the Pope denies the quote in the article or debunk it otherwise. References to a religious text will be banned because if God exists and he can lead you to the Bible as evidence, he should be able to lead you to OTHER evidence, even according to my rules. I dare religious fanatics on this site to cite a CNN article or one from a credible, modern, well known news station, that has amy evidence the Pope doesn't believe in evolution. The only other thing allowed is a legitimate recording of interview with the Pope, but even then no evidence is allowed to be related to a religiou text for the recording and the record must come from a major news station, not your own mouth or the Bible. I dare God to give you NONBIBLICAL, and non-religious evidence that actually sounds convincing to everyone that the Pope does not believe in evolution and that strictly comes from a major MODERN news station or credible web site that hasn't existed for more than 200 years.

Whether or not the Bible is correct, there's no way to cite any religous text that follows the rules. If you do not you will be banned.
Add New Argument
1 point

Who cares what the pope thinks? He isnt God nor does he represent Him!

Cartman(18192) Disputed
3 points

God made instant creation on days 5 an 6. We didnt evolve.

Evidence suggests otherwise.

Adaptation is not evolving.

Why not?

Evolution is illogical, not scientific.

The scientific theory of evolution that scientists describe is scientific. Your bullshit version of evolution is described in the Bible.

It uses biology to create a myrhical story.

That's known as facts. When you use facts you get to continue calling it facts.

So biolgy is science.

And biology contains evolution.

Evolution is a mathmatical impossibility.

Technically, everything is a mathematical impossibility with your logic.

It literally is foolish.

The only people who think that make evolution sound like their own beliefs.

Even without religion, it is foolish.

That's impossible. Your version of evolution involves your religion.

JatinNagpal(2678) Clarified
2 points

Technically, whole of existence is foolish, and the religious people have the luxury to justify it using fantasies. They'd as well worship Twilight or 50 Shades if they like what it says, and reject all evidence otherwise.

But still, this luxury is not available for those of us who won't ever be willing to worship fantasies. So, based on the value it provides, religion is more true than science.

That's the most foolish thing about existence - that thinking fantasies to be real is actually a valid excuse for it all.

KNHav(1957) Disputed
1 point

me - Adaptation is not evolving.

Cartman- Why not?

Because evolution explains "creation" not "adaptation."

Adaptation means to form change in response to change, for survival by adapting to those changes. And the kicker to evolution is adapting doesnt always result in recovery of the species. Slight changes yes, but any significant change drastic enough to cause physical adaptations would result in death even extinction.

Evolution is used as a term referring to creation of the first of living things, by which self assembling occurs creating an equilibrium in nature and the environment that didnt already exist.

Adaptation is already formed species and any adaptive features are for survival in response to changes.

Adaptation isnt initiating its responsive! It is not in creation of an environment an then fostering a creation of living things "adapting" by selections to thrive to evolve into other living things or living things in general. Why would iron adapt if its not living to begin with? Does an iron fence adapt or evolve?

So if the items were not living then by what means or reason or purpose did they adapt? Did they want to create something? Does an iron fence create?

Adaptive is making an alteration specific to survival of change. But Adaptive is to environment is as learning a new skill is to within a current carreer or already established area of skill set.

Evolution defines the environment and selects by guess what will trive till the triving expand grabbing and joining other living elements and against odds and entropy, producing a new developed species designed to trive in the environment.

Adaptation would be over time changing coloring of skin becoming more stable to the changed environment. Adaptation is not creating a being with skin from interpreting the environment by knowing what will thrive by a guess.

We do not see evolution. We see adaptation. Evolution science always distinguished the two, they reinvent the story often. Now they redefine adaptation.

Evolution is not possible because elements would have to be perfect by design, mapped out. And then that would mean evolution involves intelligent design. Its either by someone or its by nothing, but you cant have it both ways.

DNA requires memory, so if the previous 1st evolving host dies, then does he have living DNA memory to pass on, for his offspring to improve? Its chicken and the egg with neither chicken or egg to begin with.

So if oxygenization destroys the first elements of protiens then how do they have life. And if they are lucky, and happen to grow without oxygenization hindering them, but then water liquid or vapor destroys it, then how does it overcome this never ending volley?

So they grew 2 or three amino acids, but they leave out the destructive properties that they really cant isoate from, because cell walls work as designed. These would have to form without a cell wall to which keeps out harm yet shares information.

So this is the foundational reason why evolution is nonsense.

Adaptation goes from being formed and adapting. The illusion that DNA for an eye found its way to many species is simplistic faith based on many assumptions. And there is no reasonable evidence proving it, actually the opposite is true, science disproves it as a possibility.

Whereas God is provable by science probability and human experience, as well as logic and reasonable understanding of everything around us.

Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

Ooh. Failed the challenge. Bam.

1 point

So you reject whatever your leaders say? Well, Jesus didn't write anything on his own, and especially not in English, so that means that all your religion is basically a collection of fantasies. And specifically yours, because the others still belong to a group that will receive collective judgement if anything turns out to be true.

KNHav(1957) Disputed
2 points

Since over 300 prophesies detailed Jesus, its not like we are shooting in the dark! If you understand the fall, you can understand the Salvation.

The answer is in the details, and in the reason, and does the solution fit? If you look at the story line and sequence of events and history and current events and interpretive of they are logical and consistent with both Old and New Testaments. Christianity is. And much is confirmed outside of Christianity also.

The question isnt did Jesus ... the question is who is Jesus after all?

God's Word is judicial. It involves witness, testimony, evidence, affirmation, confirmation, and every fact is confirmed.

Jesus didnt claim Himself, He waited for the Father to reveal Him.

Jesus asked questions He already knew answers to, which is obvious in the texts. In one case Jesus asks who do men say that I am? They answer with correctly answering things they heard from " other men"

But then Jesus asks, "who do you say I am?" They answer thou are the Christ, the Son of the Living God" Jesus resonds saying The Father revealed it to them.

This may look like a casual conversation, and you can speculate alot if you dont understand the Bible, and God. God is judicial. If you understand that its a good place to start.

Most people think faith is blind and there is no way to know truth. Its not true. Deut says from the mouth of two or three witnesses all facts are confirmed. In this case the Father revealed, He was a witness, John the Baptist was a witness, the Hebrew scriptures were a witness, Jesus Himself was also a witness, and the knowing within themselves also was a witness.

And its also the same of false testomony. False testimony of what other men thought was proven as false by the many true witnesses.

Everytime God asks for faith, He earns faith. Faith is evidence of things unseen. Meaning faith is based on evidence confirming what we cant see.

God judged Israel always after He showed Himself evident and faithful.

The whole Bible is a dance of God revealing Himself, and man looking with natural eyes forgetting what amazing things they saw.

God always asks man to respond. But He initiates. God has shown many of you, but in your response you refuse to even look. How can God show you if you refuse to look? He wont force Himself on you.

He is light, those who love light come to the light, those who love darkness don't. If you love light He will enlighten you. If not He wouldnt give treasures so carelessly.

The question isnt who is Jesus? The question is do you love light so He leads you and enlightens you, or do you love darkness over light?

Those who love darkness refuse to look at light lest their deeds be exposed.

If you do not weigh the copious amounts of evidence proving God and His Word, you have chosen no matter what is revealed in light, you love darkness and want to be blind. Spiritual blindness is a choice, before it is a curse.

Dont misunderstand, we know why people cant see, they refuse to look because they are in opposition to the Living God, and they want the Bible to be untrue. So they make a truth and put it on their eyes as a lens, and soon God makes it tbe quality of you vision.

Its not Gods fault you dont understand Him or His Word. Its your because you choose to look through whatever lenses you choose.

Thats why the Book is sealed to you. Not because its Gods fault, but your not worthy to have it opened to you!

ghostheadX(1084) Clarified
0 points

I didn't say you can't argue AGAINST religion with religious quotes specifically.

http://catholic-pages.com/pope/peter.asp

Jesus said that Jesus built the Catholic Church and himself selected the first Pope right? Are you saying the only Pope who's opinion matters is Peter simply because Jesus selected him? Did Jesus and God not know who the future Popes would be because that seems like even inventing the concept of a Pope is a waste of God's time. If later Popes would inaccuratey represent God, why put that system in place to begin with?

KNHav(1957) Clarified
3 points

Jesus did not pick a pope!

And even if He did pick a pope, where does it say "how to pic a replacement pope?"

And why did Jesus say NOT to call any religious leaders father?

Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

Jesus did not say He built the Catholic Church, that's silly. The Catholic Church was started by Constantine in an effort to consolidate the crumbling Roman Empire. Constantine was not a Christian, he pretended to be a Christian and then tortured and killed many real Christians who trusted in the Savior and would not bow to Constantine's brand of state sanctioned religion.

There was and is and always will be only one "Pope", which is an abbreviated form of the word "Potentate". That "Pope" is Jesus Christ. Peter was not a "Pope", Peter was an apostle, a sinner, a saint who required no Catholic endorsements.

1 point

Moochellie became the first Transsexual First Lady through evolution ?

ironskillet(220) Disputed
1 point

Could I request a source for this claim? Thanks in advance.

1 point

The ape that was shot you Democrats are still upset it didn't evolve into a man or woman aren't you.

I hate evolution. As you can clearly see from the conditions today, it is heavily flawed. Also, we don't have any worthy aliens nearby.

It's rather boring.

1 point

Evolution is a lie, lies are despicable .

ironskillet(220) Disputed
1 point

Circular logic is a fallacy, fallacies construct the worst arguments.

"Creationism is a lie, lies are despicable."

I can do it to. You saying something is a lie provides no evidence.

Saintnow(3684) Clarified
1 point

Evolution is a lie. It is not science, it's pseudo science. True science observes nature, studies nature, and may apply things learned in useful or destructive ways.

It is not circular reasoning to point out that evolution is a lie. You start with the fact that evolution cannot be observed in nature and you conclude that people saying it happens when they cannot observe it happening are either deceived to believe lies or are purposely promoting lies.

To say "Creationism is a lie" is a matter of your beliefs the same as to say evolution is a lie is a matter of belief. If you conclude that it is a lie to say God created all things, I'm sure you use some kind of disjointed linear logic to reach that conclusion. By linear logic I conclude evolution is a lie and you may not believe is is a lie but I can prove it is a lie and you will probably deny the proof that evolution is a lie. There's nothing I can do about that, you don't have to believe the truth if you don't want to.. A reasonable person will agree that evolution is a lie. Most people have invested a lot in their evolutionary belief and feel they cannot afford to renounce it as a lie.

The fact that you cannot observe evolution is enough evidence to say it is a lie. The burden of proof is on those who believe in evolution to show that it is real, and that burden of proof is why they make careers and never ending constructs of pictographs trying to justify their belief in evolution. There is absolutely no societal, personal, or material benefit to believing in evolution. It's worthless, it's a lie, it's empty, it's dead. If you can't tell when you are being lied to, that's not my problem.

You may indeed use some kind of convoluted linear logic to support evolutionary belief, but you start from the position of it being real and that stance dictates your interpretation of scientific observations. It's the logical fallacy of "begging the question". You believe a lie and insist it's true and then cannot accept anything contradictory to your belief.

I believe God created all things because first of all, it is the best explanation for reality. It takes a lot of blind faith to believe in evolution and/or the big bang, or eternal matter, or parallel universes or any of the other futile attempts to explain reality. I concluded God did indeed create all things after a careful examination of different proposed explanations of reality. It was a long time (ten or fifteen years) after I concluded that God must be there that I became a Christian. You're not using your noggin very much, you are drawing conclusions which enable you to be intellectually lazy while you fool yourself into believing your immoralities are automatically excused in dying.

ghostheadX(1084) Disputed
1 point

Provide non biblical evience that evolution is a lie. Also it doesn't say humans descended from apes. It says we share a common ancestor with apes. Now I guess is the part where you cite a bible quote, proving nothing, when Charles Darwin wrote 800 pages of proof that can be replicated in scince labs and is proven fact. Otherwise, tell me more about how it says the Earth is flat and where it explicitly states in the Bible that God could not use evolution to create humans nor does it say not to listen to a geologist who writes a book about where humans come from. Unless you can cite where god uses the word "Darwin" as "the Devils work." By the way I'll bet anyone who circumnavigated the world or used the concept of evolution to invent new plants via breeding is goig to hell right?

Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

common sense should tell you evolution is a lie. People prefer the lie because they feel it excuses their immoralities.

Evolution cannot be used to invent new plants. Plants may be genetically modified by applied science, but there is no need to believe in evolution to do that. Do you realize the stuff you use are arguments is silly, all desperation to uphold your belief in evolution as a pet god you keep.

Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

The story of evolution presented as something expected to be believed should tell you it's a lie. You should be suspicious of the motives of those who promote evolution, but you probably found that by believing in it you can make yourself believe you have the right to exist outside of Hell and you feel you can embrace death as a friend who ends your suffering. Bad news...your not getting out that way. Good news.......God conquered death amd is the way out of suffering into eternal life for all who will trust in Him.

Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

Ohhhhh, it doesn's say humans descended from apes. Well excuse me Your Snobbishness, let me rephrase it....some primate type critter which looked like a monkey but was actually more like a guerrilla hybrid born of an orangutan and chimp parents... had children which looked like your grandmother who looks like a monkey only because kabillions of years and babillions of generations were not enough to lose the monkey traits out of her face.

I hope that helps.

1 point

Who cares if the Pope believes in evolution? The Poope is a sinner, he can believe lies. The Catholic Church sure promotes tons of lies, it's no surprise if they promote evolution.

1 point

Adaptation is not evolving.

Why not?

Because evolution explains "creation" not "adaptation."

Adaptation means to form change in response to change, for survival by adapting to those changes. And the kicker to evolution is adapting doesnt always result in recovery of the species. Slight changes yes, but any significant change drastic enough to cause physical adaptations would result in death even extinction.

Evolution is used as a term referring to creation of the first of living things, by which self assembling occurs creating an equilibrium in nature and the environment that didnt already exist.

Adaptation is already formed species and any adaptive features are for survival in response to changes.

Adaptation isnt initiating its responsive! It is not in creation of an environment an then fostering a creation of living things "adapting" by selections to thrive to evolve into other living things or living things in general. Why would iron adapt if its not living to begin with? Does an iron fence adapt or evolve?

So if the items were not living then by what means or reason or purpose did they adapt? Did they want to create something? Does an iron fence create?

Adaptive is making an alteration specific to survival of change. But Adaptive is to environment is as learning a new skill is to within a current carreer or already established area of skill set.

Evolution defines the environment and selects by guess what will trive till the triving expand grabbing and joining other living elements and against odds and entropy, producing a new developed species designed to trive in the environment.

Adaptation would be over time changing coloring of skin becoming more stable to the changed environment. Adaptation is not creating a being with skin from interpreting the environment by knowing what will thrive by a guess.

We do not see evolution. We see adaptation. Evolution science always distinguished the two, they reinvent the story often. Now they redefine adaptation.

Evolution is not possible because elements would have to be perfect by design, mapped out. And then that would mean evolution involves intelligent design. Its either by someone or its by nothing, but you cant have it both ways.

DNA requires memory, so if the previous 1st evolving host dies, then does he have living DNA memory to pass on, for his offspring to improve? Its chicken and the egg with neither chicken or egg to begin with.

So if oxygenization destroys the first elements of protiens then how do they have life. And if they are lucky, and happen to grow without oxygenization hindering them, but then water liquid or vapor destroys it, then how does it overcome this never ending volley?

So they grew 2 or three amino acids, but they leave out the destructive properties that they really cant isoate from, because cell walls work as designed. These would have to form without a cell wall to which keeps out harm yet shares information.

So this is the foundational reason why evolution is nonsense.

Adaptation goes from being formed and adapting. The illusion that DNA for an eye found its way to many species is simplistic faith based on many assumptions. And there is no reasonable evidence proving it, actually the opposite is true, science disproves it as a possibility.

Whereas God is provable by science probability and human experience, as well as logic and reasonable understanding of everything around us.

ironskillet(220) Disputed
1 point

Whoah, first things first. Adaptation is without a doubt evolution.

Evolution is a change in allele frequencies over time, one type of which is adaption. Adaption via natural selection is just one form of evolution.

Not to be rude, but what you're talking about when you say "evolution" is actually abiogenesis- life from non-life. While evolution and abiogeneis do fit together nicely, as they go hand-in-hand, the two don't have to co-exist, you could still have evolution/adaptation with abiogenesis.

Now that we've distinguished between the two, let's talk about abiogenesis.

"Evolution is not possible because elements would have to be perfect by design, mapped out. And then that would mean evolution involves intelligent design. Its either by someone or its by nothing, but you cant have it both ways."

Why would abiogenesis need to be perfect by design? All you need is some self-replication and memory, and boom, you have life and adaptation, all things can come from there. With the environment of early earth, such a thing would not be that hard to find. RNA world is the best hypothesis to explain this.

"DNA requires memory, so if the previous 1st evolving host dies, then does he have living DNA memory to pass on, for his offspring to improve? Its chicken and the egg with neither chicken or egg to begin with."

I'm not really sure what you're claiming here. The previous 1st evolving host? Either way, it's important to note that LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor) did not have DNA, but RNA- DNA came as a modified RNA, and is a bit different.

"So if oxygenization destroys the first elements of protiens then how do they have life. And if they are lucky, and happen to grow without oxygenization hindering them, but then water liquid or vapor destroys it, then how does it overcome this never ending volley?"

Early earth didn't have an oxidizing atmosphere like we do today. It was likely reducing, or even neutral, meaning little to no oxygen gas, perfect for complex molecules. Also, hydrolysis doesn't always occur spontaneously, it sometimes needs at least some release of energy to cause it to happen in the first place.

"So they grew 2 or three amino acids, but they leave out the destructive properties that they really cant isoate from, because cell walls work as designed. These would have to form without a cell wall to which keeps out harm yet shares information."

When you say "they grew...amino acids", I'm going to assume you're referring to Stanley Miller's 1953 experiment, which produced about 7 types of amino acids. When done again in 2008 (not by Miller), we found more than 20.

"So this is the foundational reason why evolution is nonsense."

And these are all the refutations I have provided.

"Adaptation goes from being formed and adapting. The illusion that DNA for an eye found its way to many species is simplistic faith based on many assumptions. And there is no reasonable evidence proving it, actually the opposite is true, science disproves it as a possibility.

Whereas God is provable by science probability and human experience, as well as logic and reasonable understanding of everything around us."

Once you have natural selection, anything is possible. Eukaryotes, sexual reproduction, multicellular life, organ systems, so on.

As for God being provable by "science probability" and human experience, that doesn't mean that he created the world in a week or even put life on this planet. It's likely that a God set this universe in motion, even possibly setting the starting conditions to cause life, but we don't have any evidence of supernatural interference beyond that.

Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

adaptation is without a doubt evolution? Ok, show me a fish adapting to land and changing into an amphibian, reptile, or mammal.

You can observe adaption and study it scientifically. You do not have to believe in evoluton to study adapations or changes in allelle frequenceies. Things you can scientifically observe and study do not require belief in evolution. The moment you insert your belief in evolution into your studies of science is the moment you begin wasting time wihich could be better used for science. To believe adaptation equals evolution and proves little swimmy things morphed overe many millenia into a monkey who sired your grandmother is silly

Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

Life is supernatural. The natural form of matter is to be non-living. To say we have no evidence of supernatural interference in the natural universe is ignorant, silly, laughable....God mocks atheist because they are funny and they are so serious about it. If you believe non-living matter caused life, then you believe non-living matter is supernatural....and you then uphold evolution as your magic fairy who has no wand; you believe in an absurdity because you feel it excuses your immoralities and makes you exempt from punishment in dying.

The fantasy you live is is thinking you get out of your sin in death, thinking your sins cannot be held against you when your dying is finalized at the end of your countdown in time. You hope you won't be dying forever, but if you will not repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ you will be dying forever in the fire of Hell.

This is reality, you are stuck in it and trying to fool yourself or keep yourself fooled into thinking you have the right to exist outside of Hell and you want to believe this for only one reason......you love darkness rather than light because your deeds are evil.

1 point

The elements combined that were deposited in earth were destructive to life forming - amino acids. Without incuubation of a life formed, that by miraculous chance was smart enough to incubate not just one element, but take turns. As if following directions. Take turns from one process to another, stabilizing somehow keeping other elements out. With the elements life in itsel by itself is not possible. A cell wall and membrane mimic the controlled experiments of evolution. But without the control implimented in the lab the prcess of life is not possible. Because the elements are also destructive to life.

And why would iron or water or oxygen seek to form a cell of life anyway? That's even sillier!

Its not reasonable in any stretch of imagination. Evolution is proven as failed pseudo science.

Mythological Science, they shouldn't be aloud to call it science!

Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

The "I don't know, therefore God" argument is one of the oldest in the book.

KNHav(1957) Disputed
1 point

Tell me your evolution version

Im looking for what happened before evolution soup

KNHav(1957) Disputed
1 point

Oldest what? He either exists or He doen't exist.

Me being convinced He does, and you thinking that He doesn't exist, doesnt change if He does.

Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

Are you claiming that there was never any event in the history if the world where life came from non life?

KNHav(1957) Disputed
1 point

Its basic the cells could not have developed in the first place.

KNHav(1957) Disputed
1 point

Your science should have an answer. A tangible duplicatable answer. Its science.

Dont start with a living thing. Thats starting after the fact.

In the beginning, how was it formed without destroying itself. And how did it progress and how did nature balance while the process continued and how did the first animals present themselves.

So far all I have is a story of living things after living things existed. No one explained anything other than we have a dna for eyes so some creatures got eyes.

That doesnt answer my question.

I think you cant answer. And, You dont actually know. Lol ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. 😅😂😅🙃😄😅😂

Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

So why do you make statements like this and then cling to uncounted ages in between the six days of Creation contradictory to the Bible's plain statement that God created the Heavens and the Earth and all that is in them (and that means all, and would include the angels of which Lucifer was one before he rebelled) in six literal days?

KNHav(1957) Disputed
1 point

Because there is measure of angels and measurements of man. And a day to God is not 24 hours. Each day could be millions of years. But days 5 and 6 are 24 hour days. So creation by God is instant. But I think Satan was involved in mutations. None of which had successful outcome.

KNHav(1957) Disputed
1 point

Lucifer was likely created before Gen 1: 1.

It doesnt say on any of the 6 days He created angels. Yet the fallen one and the Tree of Life guardians appear in the fall.

KNHav(1957) Disputed
1 point

The other thing it doesnt say man fell the day he was created, does it?

1 point

So far, not one evolution advocate on this site has proven evolution has validity at its foundation.

Are you willing to explain the steps of the beginning?

I was looking for something more concrete.

If evolution explain the beginning.

If you think something different then please explain your view or "facts" of the beginning of life.

I am looking for your facts of origin of life.

With all the biology i want to know the beginning of life from your view.I dont need an argument against God. I need a firm reason to think evolution has a valid logical possible beginning.

Please enrich us with profound beginning of the all powerful intelligent process of evolution. The foundation of life and the process from the beginning.Im not looking for could have. Im looking for someething sure.

Evolution seems sure. Yet they cant explain the basic beginning, the foundation.

Please be clear. Is evolution faith or fact. A logical and biologocally possible beginning will tell us that. I want to know the beginning process of life. So explain the foundation. In the beginning .... then life ...

How did it form? How did it sheild itself to continue. And how did the first formed animals begin? And also how nature was banced in the process.

Please no links. Give me the technical basics of the beginning of life and the delicate balancing of it as evolution continued.

Im speaking of life. Living things! So you can start with whatever you think happened, but I am looking for the process of llife from the beginning!

Cartman(18192) Clarified
1 point

No one is giving you an argument against God. You looked at science and argued it had nothing to do with God.

Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

Fartman, you probably lost your teeth from cussing and lying if you didn't lose them from sitting around in your fatness eating donuts all day.

Most of the people arguing in favor of evolution use their argument as their main reason for claiming to know there is no God, you know this fact is true, and you are one of those people. If not, then plainly state you believe God is there or accept the fact that I have called you a fart faced liar and am right.

JatinNagpal(2678) Clarified
1 point

It seems that you should read the Princeton Guide to Evolution.

I liked their Mathematics book (as much as I've read it, yet), so it should be good. From the description, it gives a complete account of evolution that a non-specialist can also understand.

Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

Why waste time reading books on evolution? How many books do you have to read before you can understand evolution? is it really that hard to understand that you believe an amoeba morphed into a monkey which was your grandma and that explains why her face looked like a gorilla and she always had a monkey itch and ended up with dozens of babies from many monkey daddies?

Actually this debate was all a scam. I wanted to see people yell at each other. So I stirred up something controversial. There wasn't really any point in this debate at all. on a lounge chair smiling while being interviewed.

Plate tectonics anyone? Earthquakes happen because of it? Ever visited the San Andreas fault? It once collided with people inside.

We don't need the Pope. We have science. Darwinism is dead.

https://youtu.be/bp4NkItgf0E

https://youtu.be/DfPeprQ7oGc

https://youtu.be/A9tKncAdlHQ

Here. One more for grins. I'd give you my library of links, but you wouldn't read them anyway. Atheists don't want proof.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/jun/09/75-million-year-old-dinosaur-blood-and-collagen-discovered-in-fossil-fragments

0 points

also here's a CNN article. you have to summarize the whole article and then explain how its fraudulent as well as how it got on CNN as part of the contest. The first person to do all of this with zero religion based arguments or referencesto religious texts wins. you can only compete if you believe in God and also not evolution. Atheists can still join the discussion.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/29/opinion/schlumpf-pope-evolution-big-bang/index.html

DBCooper(2194) Disputed
1 point

CNN is your go to on evolution ? Now you got it going on because everything CNN says is truth !

ghostheadX(1084) Disputed
1 point

About politics is a lie. If they tried a fake interview with the Pope then even without the Bible it would be easily debunkable.

Saintnow(3684) Disputed
1 point

The Catholic Church promotes evolution because it discredits the Bible. The Bible has always shown that the Catholic church is a pagan religion based on lies and the Catholic Church has always tried to keep people from believing the Bible. The Jesuit priests were the driving force to get the big bang story and the story of evolution into the mainstream media. It's a no-brainer that the Pope promotes and supports evolution. Why ask for proof that he does not when he does and it's no secret that he does promote evolution? The OP is a mute point.

0 points

Barack Obama is proof of evolution. Born from monkey's he was !

ironskillet(220) Disputed
1 point

Not only is this statement misinformed but also outright incorrect, somewhat racist, and doesn't even have proper grammar and formatting. Congratulations DBCooper, I think that's a new record for worst argument I've ever seen.

Saintnow(3684) Clarified
1 point

You have to admit Obama does have a lot of monkey traits in his face. I also heard he has a tail, and there are many reports of demonic activity showing in his words and actions....which of course is not intended by Obama, in his error he opens himself up for demons to use.

cownbueno(407) Disputed
1 point

Dear DBCooper,

Please return to grade school so you can re-establish an understanding of grammatical sentence structure. Your opinions are neglected and seen as stupid when you can't iterate them in a proper sentence.

- Cownbueno

Saintnow(3684) Clarified
2 points

Looks like this clownbueno is being more careful with his punctuation after I notified him how easily I could show from past posts that his writing skills are around the fourth grade level......and his creativity is not much better as he's using my jokes...but I take that as a compliment since imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. And yes I have a weakness for run-on sentences, my Achilles' heel in composition...always a chore for me to divide my sentences but I sure know how to proofread and I sure know how to spot inferior English skills.

Saintnow(3684) Clarified
1 point

You spelled your name wrong, you left out the "l", clownbueno

1 point

...........................................................................................................................