Your argument is stupid and you keep rambling about how misunderstood you are and how nobody understands you yet you fail to understand one simple thing, political correctness is both the wrongful enforcement of using language that minimises the amount of offense caused as well as the stupid belief that prioritises inoffensive words over the correct and accurate use of language, even at the expense of honesty. I've also seen political correctness used as an excuse to censor those who go against the woke agenda. Your arguments are highly worthless.
Evolution only reassembles information and connects cells to form paths based on potential energy, it doesn't create new information.
There are both plenty of Christians and atheists who voted for Donald Trump.
Shut up and grow up. Failing to capitalise an adjective isn't disrespectful to anyone, you are just a fool who loves to show off and signal how virtuous he is by telling people off for things they haven't done. Woke weirdo. Sentimental jerk.
The number of Jews killed was not 6 million. A total misconception. There is ZERO evidence that there is a rise in anti-semitism.
Snopes isn't reliable and is actually very biased, ridden with an agenda.
It's possible for the original ancestor of all apes to have died out but the apes of today are not capable of evolving into humans due to being a different species from their common ancestor.
In the batman comics blackgate prison isn't for people with mental health issues, it's for criminals who aren't deemed insane.
The worldwide flood during Noah's ark has been long debunked.
Arguing that racism came about due to certain races succeeding and then dominating the other races due to natural selection is in itself a racist belief.
Where is your evidence that cockroaches are a type of dinosaurs?
If humans had evolved from intermediaries, apes would still be evolving into humans and there are no ape-human intermediaries alive today.
Who are you asking to ban batman? It's not right to expect someone to get banned just because a specific person said so. It's against free speech.
Surely it's possible to base a religion on scientific facts as well as on myths, such a worshipping electricity.
As for the bit about entropy, I believe evolution could already be on a downward spiral and the creation of life was merely a process that took place from conversion of energy, the process of a lifeform creating a more complex lifeform such as a human being was only a temporary process and is already leading to humans reaching a point of degradation and degeneration. Surely it must be possible for entropy to still allow for the creation of cells to evolve and simply bind together to form more complex arrays initially only for the process to eventually collapse at it's peak. Can smaller organisms live long enough through the generations to adapt stably at first to then eventually collapse due to the stability becoming less viable as more progress occurs.
A consensus is only a matter of percentage, if 60% of experts agree, that is a consensus, it doesn't mean that the consensus is right.
Good point. It's like asking what's more important, water or oxygen. They both work together.
To be fair, faggot is a pretty good word, but I would also call them pussies, wimps and sissies.
There's nothing wrong with trying to be as honest as possible, there's also nothing wrong with counting your spoons. Omission isn't dishonesty if it was done out of a lack of time and opportunity as opposed to deliberate omission.
We have all lied, although that doesn't discredit the value of honesty, we have also made mistakes in life too, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't aim to make the correct decisions with little mistakes.
What I said was that at best dishonesty is passive aggressiveness, I didn't say they were the same thing all the time, just that dishonesty is in one its least worst scenarios to be considered an act of passive aggression.
Passive aggressiveness involves being indirect, but what you have erroneously equated is passive aggressiveness with merely expressing negative feelings, albeit indirectly. Passive aggressiveness is actually a form of aggression and aggression is not the same thing as expressing feelings that simply happen to be negative, aggression signifies specifically hostility of the emotion of anger, in which anger is a particular type of negative emotion and not just any negative emotion despite the broad brush that you have just applied.
Being dishonest in order to talk your way out of a situation either means you have already failed or that you failed you gain control of the situation, both things to be avoided.
By the way, your insult at the end makes you out to be a very insecure person and was very uncalled for, I suggest you avoid assuming someone is trying to come across as an academic just because they express their views and their retorts on a public forum, I dare say you are being unreasonable and quite nasty, frankly. Calling me juvenile is ironic as that is not adult behaviour on a debate platform.
I see your point, in regards to the word "faggot", I can see you are unaware of its origins. The term actually came from the British school fagging system, which has now long been banned.
There's always a better writer out there. I don't claim to be a great writer.
In most cases being honest is actually very important, dishonesty is usually backwards and regressive and usually done out of passive aggressiveness.
With no intelligence we would all be retarded, what's point being honest if everybody is retarded? In order for retarded people to exist there must be people capable of caring for them, which means we can't all be retared. While living in a world full of dishonesty would sucks, with intelligence we would be able to sift the lies from the facts ourselves.
How can it be a debate if both sides are in agreement? Is this supposed to be an open debate where each side argues there own solution to this problem?
