Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.
Debra AI Prediction
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
>>>It kind of seems like you are trying to find some way for a god to be plausible, and while I do think it is possible that something like this happened, for example, simulation theory proposes that this is likely and most life forms are sims. This, however, is very different from what is proposed by the bible, and it doesn't solve the crux of the problem. If we were indeed in a simulation, then there is a world external to ours that may have its own world external to it, and so on. We then run into the same logical issue as before.
>>>I think it is much more likely that man-made god and not the other way around. There are so many choices that can't all be true, so this means that at least most of them are invented. I just take this a step further and say they are all invented.
>>>You should keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out. Sometimes people will try to convince you the earth is flat or alternative medicine works.
You
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Ok, I'll admit that I would, but it is more likely there is some other trick here, like say the psychic is just hiding a two headed coin in his off hand, then switching them out after the flip.
"Regardless of their own scholars. You show me the creation story and the 200 people that said what they saw was true.
"Of those 1000s of creation stories other than the Bible, does any of them have 200 references?"
The kind of skirts the question of conviction. Even within the Christian faiths, there is disagreement between what is right and wrong, and how things should be interpreted.
"Regardless of their own scholars. You show me the creation story and the 200 people that said what they saw was true."
I'm no theologian, and maybe there are none. What I do know is that there are way more than 200 scientists that advocate that evolution is the origin of the species, and use the big bang as an assumption for building models of the universe.
"If you read the Bible then you know there are no dragons in there it states it is a vision with symbolism."
Yes, there are dragons in the bible, although it depends which translation you use. There are some stories that were rejected during the council of Nicea. This includes one where baby Jesus tames a bunch of dragons.
https://www.cracked.com/article_18948_5-real-deleted-bible-scenes-in-which-jesus-kicks-some-.html
If you ever visit the arc encounter, the park that advocates for the creation story run by answers in genesis, you will note it is full of dinosaurs. Many religious institutions denote that "dragons" and "dinosaurs" are one and the same.
"Let me ask you, are you saying witches were not real?"
Yes? I thought this was common knowledge that witches and witchcraft are not real, and all those killed for it died for nothing.
"Nevertheless, nothing in the Bible says the Earth is a few thousand years old.
So the idea of having "creative days" or "god time" or whatever we want to call it is incompatible with a literal interpretation of the bible. This also raises all sorts of questions like how plants survived for millions of years before the sun existed, or how the earth even existed before the sun did. Based on our current models of solar system formation this doesn't jive.
"That is why you are asserting there are other creative stories, to make the Bible seem like a book of fiction.
If you don't believe that god created the world in 7 days to mean 7 days, then you think it is fiction. If we are going to be liberal about what a day is, why not be liberal about everything else?
The evidence for evolution and a universe that came from a point via cosmic expansion is very strong. We can prove that the universe is expanding right now, and we can prove that organisms genetic information can change over time and extrapolate that change to suppose that organisms evolve.
The creation idea doesn't necessarily have to be tied to the bible. If we take this to its abstract conclusions, maybe the world is only 1 days old, has always been 1 days old, and will always be 1 days old. In other words, the world was created exactly as it is, including our memories, evidence of cosmic expansion, and everything else. Is it pragmatic to assume this? Even if the world has existed as it is for 1 day it is most useful to assume that it is billions of years old, because that has future implications in the form of things you can do with that information. You can extrapolate current trends to find things out, like how climate change is going to cause many organisms to go extinct. If you assume that everything is created, you have to make a rational to cover or deny this fact, such as "it's gods plan". Unfortunately, although the agnostic position of "we don't know what is right, and we can never know" is the least pragmatic.
Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
Through a long process of evolution this life developed into the human race.
Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .
All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Fish fins to become jointed limbs with wrists and toes, accompanied by major alterations in muscles and nerves.
Gills must change to lungs.
No fish has an extendable tongue, but amphibians such as toads do.
Amphibians have the added ability to blink since they have a membrane they pass over their eyeballs, keeping them clean.
There should be billions of each of these transitions, they disappeared.
Amphibian and reptile pose other serious problems, the shelled egg.
Amphibian laid soft, jelly-like eggs in water, where the eggs were fertilized externally.
Fish and amphibian eggs release their wastes in the surrounding water as soluble urea.
Urea within the shelled eggs of reptiles would kill the embryos.
The biggest problem is fertilization.
Reptiles are cold-blooded animals, Birds, on the other hand, are warm-blooded.
Reptiles and birds lay eggs, only birds must incubate theirs.
New instincts for building the nest, for hatching the eggs and for feeding the young.
Feathers are unique to birds, reptilian scales.
Bird’s bones are thin and hollow, unlike the reptile’s solid ones.
Muscular wings beating for hours or even days in flight generate much heat, yet, without sweat glands for cooling.
Reptiles and mammals, the lungs take in and give out air. But in birds there is a constant flow of fresh air going through the lungs, during both inhaling and exhaling.
Bird blood in the capillaries of the lungs is flowing in the opposite direction, it has this countercurrent between air and blood.
Reptiles have a three-chambered heart; a bird’s heart has four chambers.
Beaks also set birds apart from reptiles.
Birds have only four toes instead of the reptile’s five.
Mammal has mammary glands that give milk for the young.
New instincts and the muscles to suck the milk from their mother.
Highly complex placentas for the nourishment and development of their unborn young.
The organ of Corti in the ears of mammals is not found in reptilian ears.
No diaphragm in reptiles, but mammals have a diaphragm that separates the thorax from the abdomen.
Mammals also have three bones in their ears, while reptiles have only one.
Reptiles have at least four bones in the lower jaw, whereas mammals have only one.
Reptilian legs are anchored at the side of the body so that the belly is on or very near the ground. But in Mammals, as you know the legs are under the body and raise it off the ground
Mammals have greatly elaborated their teeth, instead of the simple peg-like teeth of the reptile.
There should be billions of each of these transitions, they disappeared.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Children born with mutations. Cancer happens. Viruses change their keys to infect otherwise immune hosts. Even if we attribute it to some mysterious outside force, i.e. a god made the alpha particle from the cigarette that damaged the lung tissue in a very specific way so that the cell did not die, but instead will become immortal We don't get away from the fact that the DNA of the cell is changing as entropy increases.
"If you want to say evolution is a religion then yes you can state conclusions without evidence."
There is nothing but evidence though, millions of dead things in rock, that seem to develop overtime into modern creatures, going through several large extinctions.
"If you notice that there are one or more gaps between every species"
You give a long list of all the macro differences between different orders of animals, but what you don't seem to understand is that these types of animals didn't just wake up one day as the other type, they went through multiple stages of changes and this is why there are intermediate species between different types.
For example, the platypus lays eggs and makes milk, and has venom. This seems to be strong evidence that the platypus evolved from an intermediate species, which branched off to become other mammals and modern reptiles.
"And 95% of these animals are missing!"
That's expected, it would be weird if it was the other way. How much do you know about what is buried directly under your house?
If we are talking about god, gods, or other magical deities then yes.
"I agree, but the question is who made the changes, nobody or somebody?"
The changes can and do happen on there own. In fact, for a few hundred dollars you too can edit your DNA using modern gene-editing tools like CRISPR cas9.
"But we have found only 10."
I have no idea where you got this from. The National Museum of Natural History reports that the hominin fossil record includes the remains of more than 6000 individuals. Provided that paleontologists are rare and not all of them are looking for the fossils of human ancestors in Africa, that seems reasonable.
"Also based on the process of survival of the fittest the evolved ape should have outlasted the ape."
Here we are. Successful killers are we.
"The weakest simply do not survive on their own and in today's world, we protect them and allow them to breed causing who knows what changes to the human race."
Except in the Nordic countries were fetuses with down syndrome will be aborted.
"Humans with their intelligence are changing the rules yet in doing so are only changing the evolutionary path that they normally would have gone through in the absence of such intelligence."
I completely agree, humans broke the rules by understanding that evolution is a thing. Which reminds me of something I haven't mentioned yet, which is domesticated animals.
Doesn't it seem strange to you that there is no such thing as a wild dog, dairy cow, pig, goat, sheep, or horse? ( animals that escape captivity are feral not wild ) It is because we have breed these animals to be what we want over time. In essence, they "evolved" based on our selective breeding.
Cauliflower, Broccoli, Kale, Brussel sprouts, cabbage and a few others all came from the same wild plant that was selectively breed. These plants do not exist in nature, same with so many others. an intelligent designer made these species, that intelligence being humans of course. The principal is the same though. If it happens on it's own, then we can make it happen. Any more we cause it to happen by editing DNA directly to do what we want, which is how GMO crops exist.
Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
Through a long process of evolution this life developed into the human race.
Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .
All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
>>>I'm no theologian, and maybe there are none. What I do know is that there are way more than 200 scientists that advocate that evolution is the origin of the species, and use the big bang as an assumption for building models of the universe.
>>>Yes, there are dragons in the bible, although it depends which translation you use. There are some stories that were rejected during the council of Nicea. This includes one where baby Jesus tames a bunch of dragons.
>>>So the idea of having "creative days" or "god time" or whatever we want to call it is incompatible with a literal interpretation of the bible. This also raises all sorts of questions like how plants survived for millions of years before the sun existed, or how the earth even existed before the sun did. Based on our current models of solar system formation this doesn't jive.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Or are you just hypothesizing, again?
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
"Are you saying Cancer mutations are good?"
One day, the mutations that make cancer happen may makes us immortal. It can be good for the cancer cells, but it kills the individual.
"95% missing evidence."
How much of the bible do you think is missing? Have you ever heard of the book of Enoch?
"First, you said it took millions of years to make a small change, this change would kill the evolved creature."
It doesn't always take millions of years.
"In order to live it needed to make a majority of the changes at once, which supports an intelligent designer"
Not necessarily. I think we talked about this before, the seeming paradox between the sudden evolution that is incredibly slow over long time scales, I will try to do it justice again. It's kind of like the stock market, where hour the price is all over the place and you can only notice a trend if you zoom out. Sudden market changes happen all the time, but usually people are cursing god when they do. Evolution is a lot like that. Sudden environmental changes can force evolution the same way economic factors can force changes in markets.
Remember, the difference between each animal is a lot smaller than you think. The difference between Chimpanzees and humans is only 1.2%. The information stored in the human genome is only about 725 megabytes, about the same as a 2 hour SD movie. That is like saying the "human" movie and the "chimp" movie has just a single 1'44'' scene that plays out differently. Of course it is the last minute show stopper that explains everything.
"From what did the platypus evolve?
The answer is reptiles and mammals. Monotremes split off from the Mammalian lineage before live birth had evolved, and retained many of the reptile like qualities like egg laying and venom. The idea that there are different "kinds" of animals is fairly inaccurate. They all blend together, which is strong evidence for evolution.
"Meaning we cannot conclude unless we test."
We don't need to test here, we need to observe.
"95% missing evidence."
You keep coming back to this like it somehow supports the conclusion that evolution didn't happen. If your house burnt down and 5% of your stuff survived, how much could someone know about you? Probably a lot, but not everything. If someone looked at the rubble and said "95% of the stuff is gone! I think we can conclude that nobody lived here" You would think they were crazy right? That's basically what you are trying to argue though.
At this point I think we are just talking past each other and arguing in circles. There is enough stuff here to write a small book, so unless you have any new arguments I think we are about done here.
Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
Through a long process of evolution this life developed into the human race.
Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .
All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
>>>One day, the mutations that make cancer happen may make us immortal. It can be good for the cancer cells, but it kills the individual.
"95% missing evidence."
>>>How much of the bible do you think is missing? Have you ever heard of the book of Enoch?
"First, you said it took millions of years to make a small change, this change would kill the evolved creature."
>>>It doesn't always take millions of years.
"In order to live it needed to make a majority of the changes at once, which supports an intelligent designer"
>>>Not necessarily. I think we talked about this before, the seeming paradox between the sudden evolution that is incredibly slow over long time scales, I will try to do it justice again. It's kind of like the stock market, where hour the price is all over the place and you can only notice a trend if you zoom out. Sudden market changes happen all the time, but usually, people are cursing god when they do. Evolution is a lot like that. Sudden environmental changes can force evolution the same way economic factors can force changes in markets.
>>>Remember, the difference between each animal is a lot smaller than you think. The difference between Chimpanzees and humans is only 1.2%. The information stored in the human genome is only about 725 megabytes, about the same as a 2 hour SD movie. That is like saying the "human" movie and the "chimp" movie has just a single 1'44'' scene that plays out differently. Of course, it is the last minute show stopper that explains everything.
>>>You keep coming back to this like it somehow supports the conclusion that evolution didn't happen. If your house burnt down and 5% of your stuff survived, how much could someone know about you? Probably a lot, but not everything. If someone looked at the rubble and said "95% of the stuff is gone! I think we can conclude that nobody lived here" You would think they were crazy right? That's basically what you are trying to argue though.
>>>At this point, I think we are just talking past each other and arguing in circles. There is enough stuff here to write a small book, so unless you have any new arguments I think we are about done here.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
"But in this situation, there is no indication we have lost anything."
95% missing data.
How can we know if we have lost 95% of the data if there is no indication if we lost anything? This single statement completely undermines all the claims you have made based on that point.
Here is a paper that reconciles that 95% controversy you talk about:
https://academic.oup.com/sysbio/article/60/5/719/1643436
All I have to say is the evidence for a universe that is billions of years old where we exist for no particular reason is overwhelming and the evidence for a meaningful creation is none. If you expect there to be some sort of purpose for you from birth, you are basically asking someone to take advantage of you. If you recognize that there is no purpose unless you make one for yourself, you are free. Freedom is good.
Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
Through a long process of evolution this life developed into the human race.
Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .
All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
But this number is absolutely irrelevant. Whether it is 0%, 5%, 95%, 99.999999999% or 9.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999%, what we are looking for is a model that describes the observations well. A model cannot describe missing observations by definition, but as long as it aligns with the existing observations, the model is valid.
The requirement that science collects all the data possibly available, and default acceptance of some other theory otherwise, is a variation of the old good nirvana fallacy. In that fallacy, one compares an unrealistically idealised version of one entity with the real world version of another entity, and declares that the former is preferable - for example, one could compare the idealised version of communism found nowhere but in Marx' books, with the real world version of capitalism with all of its flaws, and declare, "Communism is better!"
Same here: people expect science to have all the data possible, yet for the alternative version - creationism - nothing really is required, but a few sentences in the Bible. With such incredibly different standards, of course one will come to the conclusion that the evolution theory is less plausible than the creationist theory. Only it is a very disingenuous conclusion.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
I am not sure how you derived this conclusion from my words, but that is not at all what I am saying. I am saying that the fraction of data we have of all the available data has absolutely no relevance to whether a theory should be accepted or not.
What is important is that
a) No known data explicitly contradicts the hypothesis;
b) The hypothesis is falsifiable;
c) The hypothesis has predictive power.
Most hypotheses go down immediately just based on b) or c), and the vast majority of the remaining ones fail a). But evolution theory does not fail a), b) or c), and we have terabytes of data, which makes statistical uncertainty minimal.
In case of "creation", the hypothesis fails both b) and c). It does not fail a), and it cannot fail a) in principle by its very design. Such hypotheses are completely useless and should be discarded immediately, so as to not clutter our knowledge database with garbage data.
Even if you had a case to make against evolution theory (which you probably do not), it would still not redeem creationism in any way. "Creation" is not a valid scientific theory regardless of any data we may have. To make it scientific, you would have to modify it in a pretty drastic way. For example, you could theorise that we were created by aliens that visited our planet in the past and sprayed some biological material around - that is something that does not fail a), b) and c), and you could start making predictions and collecting data. Which is something some scientists have tried doing, to no avail so far, but still.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Those who believe in creation myths are exactly the same as those who believe in a flat Earth no matter what evidence they are presented with they deny it in favour of the words from a contradictory book of nonsense
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
I have approached this from multiple different angles, but you still cling to this like it's somehow going to save your world view.
95% evidence missing is 5% prof. We don't need every little detail to draw a conclusion, it just makes it makes the models we make with that information more accurate.
Evolution is a model of reality, not reality. Equations we use in physics are models. The understanding we have of how stars form and planets rotate is a model. I can not stress this enough.
If we have built our model on 5% of the data, we might expect the remainder of the data to be self similar to our sample. If we had more data, our model would get more accurate, but there would be a diminishing return on investment. going from 90% to 95% is going to yield almost no new information, where going from 5% to 10% would yield tons of new information. That's just how it is.
Keep in mind, this is only talking about evolution here. You haven't even begun to contest with cosmology, which clearly proves that the universe is billions of years old.
The only out for Christianity and the bible is to take a metaphysical interpretation of the book of genesis.
Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
Through a long process of evolution this life developed into the human race.
Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .
All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
?
CRISPR Cas-9 is a protein that is found in certain bacteria that facilitates the integration of DNA into it's sequence as part of the bacteria's immune system. IT IS NOT FOUND NATURALLY IN PLANT OR ANIMAL CELLS! Humans have very recently, figured out how to use these proteins to splice DNA into specific parts of existing DNA, allowing for the integration of new genes into the genome.
When CRISPR Cas-9 is used to change DNA in a meaningful way, it is HUMANS who are doing it intelligently, not god, gods, or other mystical beings!
Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
Through a long process of evolution this life developed into the human race.
Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .
All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Natural sciences are not about finding "proofs"; they are about constructing models that describe the observations well.
Predictions do not have to refer to the future event. Predictions may simply refer to finding new already existing data. For example, in astrophysics we make predictions on the outcome of a neutron star merger event; obviously we will never observe one clearly, if at all, but we can say, "Okay, this is what we would expect the consequences of such an event to be" - and then we can find the evidence of those consequences from the merger events that have already occurred by observations.
You seem to misunderstand how the science operates. We do not perform experiments to see every possible event with our own eyes. We perform experiments to test various aspects of our hypothesis, and those aspects can often be very narrow - but their ensemble leads to a coherent theory as a whole.
1) Evolution does not have to happen slowly, although in general it is expected to do so.
2) Evolution explains fairly well how different species are historically related. I am not aware of any serious issues that would put the theory as a whole under question.
3) Evolution does not claim that "something came from nothing". Sceptics should drop this strawman argument already.
4) Mutations can be both beneficial and not. Evolution claims that beneficial mutations have a higher probability to stick, due to the evolutionary mechanisms, but individual mutations do not have to be beneficial. It is a statistical effect, not a hard law applicable to individual cases.
This is not about belief; this is about rigorous logic. If you "believe" in Evolution, then you are doing it wrong.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
I admire your efforts in attempting to educate yet another religious nut , it’s absolutely futile and will end in frustration people like this guy cannot have his world view shaken or disturbed in any way so will resort to dishonesty , deflection and lies ....
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
**** I appreciate you debating, as @Dee calls me, the religious nut.
You seem like a pretty decent person and I call you this I guess out of frustration as you seem be intelligent enough to comprehend what I stated as in Evolution is accepted as fact and the evidence for it is overwhelming.
It’s like this debate keep being put forward by believers knowing they have’nt a leg to stand on
Where I’m from deniers of Evolution are indeed placed in the same category as flat earthers is that comparison unfair and if so why?
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Thank you my friend I appreciate that
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
**=*It is fair
Fair point. But do you agree that a racist may feel good about the choices they make as they feel it’s a duty as in a form of Patriotism , for example he sees black people as the enemy as they are taking jobs and resources Americans should be getting?
Someone like that will go to their grave thinking they have made the right choices and would feel good about it
Do you see it that way in your country? I read recently that it’s virtually impossible for an Atheist to be voted into office in the U S and that religious thinking has a huge influence on politics and educational matters in the US , is this assessment wrong?
I’m guessing you’re American apologies if I’m wrong. Where I’m from religion is very easy going my wife and family are Catholic and we all get along just fine , religion rarely comes up in my society and that’s from a country where the Catholic once ruled with a fist of Iron. The people mostly believers got sick of being told how to live and how to behave and the church lost its dominance and merged into a newer softer more people friendly religion
I guess for me as an atheist I dislike the arrogance of a lot of believers who point the finger and tell me I’m immoral without knowing me , I’m also amazed that someone would knock on someone’s front door and tell them “Jesus loves you “ without being invited , I laugh when I think if I knocked on a Christians door and said “ There is no god” a Christian would be outraged and would be astonished that someone had the temerity to do so
Thats very decent of you Sand but honestly not necessary. Without wishing to cause offence I debated before on many sites with believers of all persuasions Muslims , Hindus , Buddhists etc , etc but I’ve yet to come across anywhere anything like the American version of Christianity which seems to be very aggressive and divisive as in one can nearly always tell whether one is talking to a Republican or a Democrat when religion comes up. Nearly every time an American believer will insist Jesus would be pro gun , anti Universal health care , anti social welfare , anti social housing and would be in favour of a wall being built and they seriously gather in churches on Sunday and talk about loving your neighbour
Long may that continue I’ve seen by your exchanges you’re an intelligent decent person and I apologise for my remark again I guess when Evolution comes up I get a bit heated up as in , say evolution was proven to be nonsense that still would not prove a god exists right? Why do a lot of believers insist that it’s some grand plan by Atheists to pollute young minds when it’s the total opposite and it’s still there to be challenged by anyone who thinks it in error.
Creationists have told me in the past scientists won’t post up their studies as they’re biased, this is absolute nonsense and the sort of thing drives me nuts as it’s totally dishonest yet believers in evolution are constantly branded the dishonest ones
I wonder do you ever visit sites like Rational Wiki and do a search on various subjects relating to religion? It’s an eye opener and not for those who don’t want to be challenged
I would never do that I look forward to future encounters it’s been a pleasure.
Here is something called the Evil god challenge the guy who put it together is Professor Stephen Law a Philosopher who’s books on philosophy are brilliant , the video is short but throughly thought provoking...... https://youtu.be/lqEl_mt7Hhk
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
>>>Do you see it that way in your country? I read recently that it’s virtually impossible for an Atheist to be voted into office in the US and that religious thinking has a huge influence on politics and educational matters in the US, is this assessment wrong?<<<
>>>I’m guessing you’re American apologies if I’m wrong. Where I’m from religion is very easy going my wife and family are Catholic and we all get along just fine, religion rarely comes up in my society and that’s from a country where the Catholic once ruled with a fist of Iron. The people mostly believers got sick of being told how to live and how to behave and the church lost its dominance and merged into a newer softer more people-friendly religion<<<
>>>I would never do that I look forward to future encounters it’s been a pleasure.
Fascinating
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
****Sorry for the delay.
Not at all always reply in your own time , I’ve all the time in the world I’m an artist I work from home
*****I feel we have to be careful with Patriotism.
Yes look at the levels Hitler brought it to . I watched a news report of Trump at a rally giving a speech the audience were wearing white tee shirts saying ....Pro Life , Pro gun , Pro god Trump is brilliant at whipping up patriotism but it is to me very divisive the way he’s doing it and is creating a load of problems down the road.
Why can politicians not instead seek inclusion , unity , fairness etc, etc?
****This is happening with the NBA and China. I think that a racist person doesn't think they are racist, they discriminate about certain groups of people.
Yes anything may be perceived as a threat by them
****Out of all ethnic groups, African Americans, Puerto Rican Americans, and Native Americans have some of the highest rates of incarceration.
Take black people as an example, there are more black males incarcerated in the United States than all women imprisoned globally. To give perspective there are just about 4 billion women in total globally, there are only 19 million black males of all ages in the United States.
Everyone takes 2 seconds to assess a person, they fill in the majority of questions in their mind about the person in a glance.
I spoke with a USA Police officer, and he indicated that he has to discriminate to save lives. When he sees certain trends he acts on hunches and ideas about people's character based on income, race, status, etc.
Not to say this was right, but to get his viewpoint on how he approaches his job.
Fascinating and in fairness to the cop wouldn’t we do likewise?
****Nevertheless, when a person sees these statistics about black people it is understandable why people make assumptions that a black person is up to no good.
The real answer I feel is the level of legal protection they have in the USA. Because of the economic education of black people, a good portion of their lives paycheck to paycheck.
Not to say what their status financially is, but if they are well off sometimes they still live paycheck to paycheck. So when serious legal issues occur.
I have noticed the first things out of a black person's mouth is not "let me speak to my lawyer". If they do say those words it is a request for a public defender.
Public defender income is $47K - $76K, whereas a prosecutor's income is $49K to $142K. Average prosecutor cases 90 per year versus 250 average cases per year for public defenders.
This comes to approximately $545 to $1578 per case prosecutor versus $188 to $304 per case with a public defender.
So which job would you take? Overwhelmed, overworked, with less pay versus high pay, less stress, underwhelmed.
As far as they feeling good about it, our minds have to justify everything we do or we loose grip on mentally on reality.
The major mental illnesses are brought on because someone accepts a bad feeling for a decision they made, whether it is in their control or not.
Most interesting and thank you for filling me in
****You are right in a sense. The USA concept is rule by the people. The founders of the USA came to primarily have religious freedom. So one of the pillars estabilished was freedom of religion.
So the majority of the USA citizens are religious people. To get elected as President of the USA you have to gain the favor of the majority of the people.
So since the majority of the people are religious (82%) versus 18% atheist, in order to have an effective campaign your goal is to relate to your audience.
I would vote for someone going on their track record religion should never come Into it
****The problem with religion is hypocrites. It is hard to be a real Christian. Most people I find do not work to demonstrate the qualities that are a prerequisite to being a Christian.
I honestly think a lot of them only claim to be Christian out of habit , it’s like members of a golf club who don’t even own clubs
****In insurance, you are taught a code of ethics that you have to agree upon and maintained throughout the career. The same is the case with Religion but people are not taught the code before becoming one.
People like you are an example on how a decent human being should behave and you’re walking the walk
****LOL. You are right.
A man forced against his will is of the same mind still.
I am embarrassed to see people like RickeyD, be so cruel to people, and their viewpoints.
That I hope I am not coming across like that.
You and him are poles apart , the poor man I feel is deeply troubled
****Religion has lost touch of what it was supposed to be, people use it as a license to do badness and a stick to attack others.
Love is supposed to be the main quality in the Bible. Whenever I speak with someone of another Religion, I mention "love" and it is like they snap back for 2 seconds.
But then they go back to their ways. The reason why I think is that they were not taught, instead, they got Religion by osmosis.
They are people doing bad things claiming to be good people and it is sad.
This is where changing them is hard because they cannot see who they really are.
And if you show them in a mirror, then they will deny it.
Yes , it’s like they proclaim one thing but do the complete and utter opposite
****It's crazy, I wish an Atheist would be the President and place a law to tax religion at 40%.
At a 20% tax rate, we are talking somewhere around 90 billion.
I believe this would reduce the reason for people use religion as a license.
A very good point
****Of course, that is not my plan. I want to build a business and fund a religious college that teaches positive thinking as solutions for mental, entrepreneur, and sabbatical health.
I wish you every success with that and thank you for giving me your views I appreciate it
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra