Only 15% of Americans accept evolution.

[Dyakovo]

1: Not relevant.
2: Opinions based on faith have, by definition, no facts supporting them.
3: The topic has nothing to do with LGBT rights.

1. /
2. That is why it is called FAITH.
3. The topic has also nothing to do with you or me accepting evolution. The topic's name is ''Only 15% of Americans accept evolution''.

2: Exactly.
3, There's more to the topic than the thread title, in fact, the thread title doesn't necessarily have anything to do with what the topic is.

[Tlaceceyaya]

So leprechauns cause rainbows?

Why?

2. /
3. Because no one here is debating about how Americans don't accept evolution.

2: You said you're right because you have faith, which translates to saying you're right because you have no evidence. There is no evidence that leprechauns cause rainbows. Therefore, they must?
3: Yes, they are.

[Ovisterra]

Of course in many instances this is true. But in this case, they're just being ignorant, and they're not looking it up...

I will "admit" to being a Catholic person. Is this really bad? Why do I not have the rights to say this without atheists and so on saying that 'you are ignorant' or that 'you are stupid'.

Because the first one, at least, is true. The second one is nasty, but no one will say it here, I hope.

Beliefs need to be analysed and criticised. It's how progress is made.

As Emeli Sandé once said: "If the truth has been forbidden, then we're breaking all the rules".

It is really not fair, I do not attack your beliefs.

That's your choice.

Even if I am wrong, there is no need for you to put people down due to what they have belief in.

If they are wrong then there is plenty of need.

Sure we can debate, and I'd love to debate the proof of a higher god of some sort, which is quite likely, although it is true that which god cannot be said for. I don't know how to really put this in words, but if there is only one life, surely it's better to respect others' beliefs of a second life and you be right, rather than call them out, and vice-versa?

I respect your beliefs. If I didn't respect them, I wouldn't be trying to prove them wrong.

[Enadail]

Of course in many instances this is true. But in this case, they're just being ignorant, and they're not looking it up...

I will "admit" to being a Catholic person. Is this really bad? Why do I not have the rights to say this without atheists and so on saying that 'you are ignorant' or that 'you are stupid'. It is really not fair, I do not attack your beliefs. Even if I am wrong, there is no need for you to put people down due to what they have belief in.

Sure we can debate, and I'd love to debate the proof of a higher god of some sort, which is quite likely, although it is true that which god cannot be said for. I don't know how to really put this in words, but if there is only one life, surely it's better to respect others' beliefs of a second life and you be right, rather than call them out, and vice-versa?

Is being Catholic bad? No. Is ignoring facts because you don't want them to be true bad? Yes.

Science is not about belief: its about finding out what is.

If proof of a god is likely, please, provide it. But there is only one life as far as we know, and just playing nice to be nice will land us all back in the dark ages. Ignoring knowledge, information, and science simply leads to problems.

[Katganistan]

coughwhatwereyouguyssayingaboutpersonalinsultscough

This is actually (hopefully, anyways) for a new IC main.
As I have said before, I hate NSG.

NSG=Cancer

//end thread

How about *** Warned for trolling and spamming ***

[Katganistan]

You are obviously acquainted with this place, being an obvious puppet here to dance on the borders of the rules without your main nation being threatened.

coughwhatwereyouguyssayingaboutpersonalinsultscough

This is actually (hopefully, anyways) for a new IC main.
As I have said before, I hate NSG.

*** Warned for trolling ***

[Maudlnya]

NSG=Cancer

//end thread

How about *** Warned for trolling and spamming ***

Ahh.. Sorry about that... harmless joke

Well maybe it isn't but sorry...

[Manahakatouki]

Of course in many instances this is true. But in this case, they're just being ignorant, and they're not looking it up...

I will "admit" to being a Catholic person. Is this really bad? Why do I not have the rights to say this without atheists and so on saying that 'you are ignorant' or that 'you are stupid'. It is really not fair, I do not attack your beliefs. Even if I am wrong, there is no need for you to put people down due to what they have belief in.

Sure we can debate, and I'd love to debate the proof of a higher god of some sort, which is quite likely, although it is true that which god cannot be said for. I don't know how to really put this in words, but if there is only one life, surely it's better to respect others' beliefs of a second life and you be right, rather than call them out, and vice-versa?

I have no problem with people and their beliefs, and I know people who believe in God, and other things I disagree with, and we normal conversations and debates at times. However, these people know what they believe in because they've researched it, and they have the right then to disagree and say I'm wrong. But these people tell me that evolution is wrong, and with no research, expect me to believe so because they just don't, and should I. It just upset me...

[Individuality-ness]

Of course in many instances this is true. But in this case, they're just being ignorant, and they're not looking it up...

I will "admit" to being a Catholic person.

That's nice.

Is this really bad?

Not on it's own.

Why do I not have the rights to say this without atheists and so on saying that 'you are ignorant' or that 'you are stupid'.

For the same reason why we can't say we're atheist without religious people saying "you're going to burn in hell!!!".

Also, I have yet to see people resort to ad hominen in this debate as of so far today, although if you feel that we're breaking site rules, you're free to report us to Moderation.

It is really not fair, I do not attack your beliefs. Even if I am wrong, there is no need for you to put people down due to what they have belief in.

So it's okay to suppress discussion and criticism so that you can sleep at night?

Sure we can debate, and I'd love to debate the proof of a higher god of some sort, which is quite likely, although it is true that which god cannot be said for. I don't know how to really put this in words, but if there is only one life, surely it's better to respect others' beliefs of a second life and you be right, rather than call them out, and vice-versa?

The same could be said to religious zealots, although if you want to go into the debate on whether God exists or not we do have a thread for that.

[Crolacia]

I will "admit" to being a Catholic person. Is this really bad? Why do I not have the rights to say this without atheists and so on saying that 'you are ignorant' or that 'you are stupid'. It is really not fair, I do not attack your beliefs. Even if I am wrong, there is no need for you to put people down due to what they have belief in.

Sure we can debate, and I'd love to debate the proof of a higher god of some sort, which is quite likely, although it is true that which god cannot be said for. I don't know how to really put this in words, but if there is only one life, surely it's better to respect others' beliefs of a second life and you be right, rather than call them out, and vice-versa?

Is being Catholic bad? No. Is ignoring facts because you don't want them to be true bad? Yes.

Science is not about belief: its about finding out what is.

If proof of a god is likely, please, provide it. But there is only one life as far as we know, and just playing nice to be nice will land us all back in the dark ages. Ignoring knowledge, information, and science simply leads to problems.

I really do not understand you guys. If I believe in God, you can't tell me to prove God exists because I have no proof. That is why I am believing it! I'm not certain of it.

[Pacifistic Union]

Everyone that's met me (Arcturus Novus) knows that I'm an evolutionist, and I can sincerely say that as soon as I'm financially able, I'm moving to England.
This is quite ridiculous. There's a lot of evidence that points to evolution, and the fact that they can't at least partially accept it is maddening.

[Tlaceceyaya]

Is being Catholic bad? No. Is ignoring facts because you don't want them to be true bad? Yes.

Science is not about belief: its about finding out what is.

If proof of a god is likely, please, provide it. But there is only one life as far as we know, and just playing nice to be nice will land us all back in the dark ages. Ignoring knowledge, information, and science simply leads to problems.

I really do not understand you guys. If I believe in God, you can't tell me to prove God exists because I have no proof. That is why I am believing it! I'm not certain of it.

But why do you believe in god?

[Enadail]

Is being Catholic bad? No. Is ignoring facts because you don't want them to be true bad? Yes.

Science is not about belief: its about finding out what is.

If proof of a god is likely, please, provide it. But there is only one life as far as we know, and just playing nice to be nice will land us all back in the dark ages. Ignoring knowledge, information, and science simply leads to problems.

I really do not understand you guys. If I believe in God, you can't tell me to prove God exists because I have no proof. That is why I am believing it! I'm not certain of it.

He said he'd love to debate the proof of a god, which is likely, which indicates there is proof. Unless you are The Ehrlich posting on a different account, I wasn't asking you for proof, so there's nothing to understand. If you claim to have proof of God, I'd ask you as well. As far as I know, you haven't.

[Ovisterra]

Is being Catholic bad? No. Is ignoring facts because you don't want them to be true bad? Yes.

Science is not about belief: its about finding out what is.

If proof of a god is likely, please, provide it. But there is only one life as far as we know, and just playing nice to be nice will land us all back in the dark ages. Ignoring knowledge, information, and science simply leads to problems.

I really do not understand you guys.

That's normal. I don't understand me either.

If I believe in God, you can't tell me to prove God exists because I have no proof. That is why I am believing it! I'm not certain of it.

We're trying to help you by teaching you to be scientific.

[The Ehrlich]

I really do not understand you guys. If I believe in God, you can't tell me to prove God exists because I have no proof. That is why I am believing it! I'm not certain of it.

He said he'd love to debate the proof of a god, which is likely, which indicates there is proof. Unless you are The Ehrlich posting on a different account, I wasn't asking you for proof, so there's nothing to understand. If you claim to have proof of God, I'd ask you as well. As far as I know, you haven't.

Before I get, I will do a second post, I found the translation for this. Thermodynamics of the second law is broken by evolution. I will do the second part in post 2.

[Ovisterra]

Thermodynamics of the second law is broken by evolution.

This ought to be good.

[Merriwhether]

I am skeptical that a perfect combination of gasses exploded, to place a star in just the right place, after which a planet developed (perfectly placed) as well for it to have water and life (very convenient, I'd say). I personally don't believe in coincidences, and the creation of the earth involved quite a few of those according to you, for instance. Therefore, I believe in intelligent design.

According to basic probability, experts have calculated there to be approximately 5,000 planets with life or with all the necessary ingredients for life in our galaxy. Even if half of those planets had an environmental catastrophe that prevented life, or lacked just one ingredient that caused it not to form, that's 2,500 planets with life, and probably 500 of which that have intelligent life.

That's enough to say that there's some planet somewhere that is having every one of the same historic ages that we've had, and that it is inevitable that one of those races is Interstellar.

And, it is more likely than not that they have no religion whatsoever besides Evolutionism, and that religion never existed to them.
When you consider it from their PoV, we look like serious idiots praying to the Universe to protect us from disaster.

[Priory Academy USSR]

He said he'd love to debate the proof of a god, which is likely, which indicates there is proof. Unless you are The Ehrlich posting on a different account, I wasn't asking you for proof, so there's nothing to understand. If you claim to have proof of God, I'd ask you as well. As far as I know, you haven't.

Before I get, I will do a second post, I found the translation for this. Thermodynamics of the second law is broken by evolution. I will do the second part in post 2.

No. Just no. Sunlight provides all the extra energy needed to sustain more complex lifeforms, hence the 'Goldilocks Zone' for planets with potentially advanced life.

[Mavorpen]

He said he'd love to debate the proof of a god, which is likely, which indicates there is proof. Unless you are The Ehrlich posting on a different account, I wasn't asking you for proof, so there's nothing to understand. If you claim to have proof of God, I'd ask you as well. As far as I know, you haven't.

Before I get, I will do a second post, I found the translation for this. Thermodynamics of the second law is broken by evolution. I will do the second part in post 2.

Stop right there. Just stop. The second law of thermodynamics applies to isolated systems. The Earth is not an isolated system.

[The Ehrlich]

I will "admit" to being a Catholic person.

That's nice.

Is this really bad?

Not on it's own.

Why do I not have the rights to say this without atheists and so on saying that 'you are ignorant' or that 'you are stupid'.

For the same reason why we can't say we're atheist without religious people saying "you're going to burn in hell!!!".

Also, I have yet to see people resort to ad hominen in this debate as of so far today, although if you feel that we're breaking site rules, you're free to report us to Moderation.

It is really not fair, I do not attack your beliefs. Even if I am wrong, there is no need for you to put people down due to what they have belief in.

So it's okay to suppress discussion and criticism so that you can sleep at night?

Sure we can debate, and I'd love to debate the proof of a higher god of some sort, which is quite likely, although it is true that which god cannot be said for. I don't know how to really put this in words, but if there is only one life, surely it's better to respect others' beliefs of a second life and you be right, rather than call them out, and vice-versa?

The same could be said to religious zealots, although if you want to go into the debate on whether God exists or not we do have a thread for that.

When I say putting down, I mean just calling someone an idiot or being nasty just because you disagree.

[Ceannairceach]

He said he'd love to debate the proof of a god, which is likely, which indicates there is proof. Unless you are The Ehrlich posting on a different account, I wasn't asking you for proof, so there's nothing to understand. If you claim to have proof of God, I'd ask you as well. As far as I know, you haven't.

Before I get, I will do a second post, I found the translation for this. Thermodynamics of the second law is broken by evolution. I will do the second part in post 2.

Explain how, or don't bring it up.

[Individuality-ness]

That's nice.


Not on it's own.


For the same reason why we can't say we're atheist without religious people saying "you're going to burn in hell!!!".

Also, I have yet to see people resort to ad hominen in this debate as of so far today, although if you feel that we're breaking site rules, you're free to report us to Moderation.


So it's okay to suppress discussion and criticism so that you can sleep at night?


The same could be said to religious zealots, although if you want to go into the debate on whether God exists or not we do have a thread for that.

When I say putting down, I mean just calling someone an idiot or being nasty just because you disagree.

And like I said, if we're breaking site rules, you're free to report us in Moderation. I'm just going to say that I have not seen anyone personally insult you for your beliefs, only state that your beliefs are incorrect and why.

[Crolacia]

I really do not understand you guys.

That's normal. I don't understand me either.

If I believe in God, you can't tell me to prove God exists because I have no proof. That is why I am believing it! I'm not certain of it.

We're trying to help you by teaching you to be scientific.

I really don't need any help. I have maaaany atheist friends and we get along just fine. They are not trying to ''help me'' and vice versa. I am not sick

[The Ehrlich]

Before I get, I will do a second post, I found the translation for this. Thermodynamics of the second law is broken by evolution. I will do the second part in post 2.

Explain how, or don't bring it up.

Evolution organises the matter itself which is impossible, as the second law of thermodynamics means that matter would be unable to organise itself unless there was an external force applied. Sunlight is not enough for this.

Yes, I have begun using BING translator.

[Great Nepal]

He said he'd love to debate the proof of a god, which is likely, which indicates there is proof. Unless you are The Ehrlich posting on a different account, I wasn't asking you for proof, so there's nothing to understand. If you claim to have proof of God, I'd ask you as well. As far as I know, you haven't.

Before I get, I will do a second post, I found the translation for this. Thermodynamics of the second law is broken by evolution. I will do the second part in post 2.

Awesome!
I am calling Nobel prize committee to observe upcoming definition. You will mention us in your Nobel prize acceptance speech right?