1

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Evolution

« on: November 25, 2011, 04:57:35 PM »

you have no proof 1

anyone who supports the hurtful agenda called evolution is in essence, ANTI-GOD

that's what evolution is anyways. a way to SPIT in God's face and to discredit everything he has created2

humans are so stupid and ignorant3

to think we are the true Gods, lmao4

keep thinking that

while you are prancing around and playing God, please create me a universe

I'm waiting....5

if God doesn't exist then why waste their time to try and discredit it?6

because God does exist and they want God removed from the earth forever

that's where you get weather modification, GMO food, and all the other sick BS going on in our world today. us stupid humans are the real God. hahaha, give me a break.7

to think we are more "high" than the highest of the high?8

1. Neither do you.

2. Are there stamps on everything that says "Made by God"?

You people who talk like you know God actually exists is makes me laugh, to quote you somewhat. You can't prove that God exists.
 
3. If you don't like it, get out. I personally don't care who created the universe, because, once we find out, what will change?

4. I don't think that. Plenty of people don't think we are.

5. Who are you to "demand" evidence like that? You aren't any greater or lesser than the average human being. In fact, why don't YOU create me a universe with your belief in God? Once we reach this stalemate, your claims become useless. Goodnight to that "attack".

6. Because people like you believe in it and tell them that they're wrong. That's why they try to discredit it.

7. Let's assume God exists. What's to stop human curiosity about these kinds of things? IT's exactly the same as trying to find out how the universe began. And before you say "God made it", prove it. And if your only point is "Prove it wrong" then we've reached a stalemate again.

8. AT least we know that humans exist.

2

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Evolution

« on: November 22, 2011, 01:02:32 AM »

It's relevant if one is attempting to disregard the possibility while arguing the proposed dynamics of stellar evolution.

It's irrelevant because you can't prove it either way. Sure, you can say "Stars are alive" but the other person has equal weighting in the argument to say "Stars are not alive." Since there isn't any extra evidence to tip the scale, any argument about stars being alive or not will always reach a stalemate.

3

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Evolution

« on: November 21, 2011, 11:55:59 PM »

It speaks entirely to the question at hand.

Perhaps, but how is one person going to prove whether or not stars are alive?

Are you entirely certain that stars are not living objects?

They can't prove that stars are not living objects
You can't prove that stars are living objects.
There's no possible way for there to be conclusive proof supporting either direction in a single human being's capacity. Hence, this argument has no consequence, regardless of whether or not it applies to the question.

4

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Evolution

« on: November 21, 2011, 11:48:17 PM »

A living object is infinitely more complicated than a star.

Are you entirely certain that stars are not living objects?

There's no way to possibly prove this one way or the other in an average person's capacity. There's no consequence to this point.

5

Flat Earth Debate / Evolution

« on: November 21, 2011, 02:44:11 AM »

Q: "How is it that the Earth does not have a gravitational pull, but stars and the moon do?"

A: This argument is a non-sequitur. You might as well ask, "How is it that snakes do not have legs, but dogs and cats do?" Snakes are not dogs or cats. The Earth is not a star or the moon. It does not follow that each must have exactly the properties of the others, and no more.

This argument has no consequence. Snakes do not have legs because they don't need legs to function. Evolution does not apply to abiotic features of the universe, which includes celestial bodies.
Unless of course, you decide to bring religion into the mix. "God created snakes that way and simply 'decided' that these things would be like that". Of course, there is no conclusive evidence of the existence of a God or otherwise.
Assuming that no-one manages to prove the existence of God or uses the argument "Why don't YOU prove that God DOESN'T exist?", several arguments FES is based upon rely on assumptions.
Of course, feel free to "counter argue" as it may well be.

6

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The merged ultimate challenge for FE'ers

« on: November 21, 2011, 02:32:57 AM »

Observe ad hominem please. It's not the objective to insult each other.

I suggest you dispense your massive incompetence somewhere else; you're waisting everyone's time here.

For example.