Sex Could Not Have "Evolved"

Someone wrote: "Wrong -- Chicken eggs always come from chickens, so the chicken egg could not possibly have come first. Are you a child, you did not read what I said. Read it again if you want to have the smallest understanding of what I mean, or will that be too hard for you to understand?" The truth makes you angry. LOL SMH =) No it didn't -- that scenario is nothing but your own personal faith-based religious belief, but it is not observable science. Yes it does have meaning. "I never made that claim, so that is a straw man logical fallacy on your part. You did make the claim that evolution did not create gender" No I didn't, you liar. ", so you are the one being logically unsound thank you very much." Without God, nobody could make an objective distinction between sound logic and unsound logic. "We may have" is not observable science -- it is your faith-based religious belief. "It is possible" is not observable science -- it is merely your faith-based religious belief. "I have no religion" Yes you do. ", so you are just plain wrong" No I'm not. "Evolution is observable" No it isn't. " through what we uncover from the past." How do you "observe" the past? Magic? A time-machine? A crystal ball? You are a ridiculous and ignorant moron. "Have we found any acts of Hindu gods recorded," There is only one God, and he is not a Hindu. "...your God is real...." There is only one God, and he is not mine -- you and I both belong to him, actually. " threw logic or fact" Without God, nobody could make an objective distinction between the logical and the illogical, and without God, nobody could make an objective distinction between fact and fiction. "you just have a faith based religion...." No I don't. No it isn't -- "luck" does not exist in reality. "Luck" is also just part of your faith-based religious belief system, but is not observable science. Also, you failed to provide any evidence for your "luck," so my point that it doesn't exist is well-taken. Actually, your "luck" really is nothing but your own personal faith-based religious belief. LOLOLOLOL "...God to accept facts." Without God, nobody could make an objective distinction between facts and falsehoods. " There could be 2000 genders" No there couldn't. "your God" There is only one God, and he is not mine. Actually, all of us belong to him. That statement is what is known as a "brute fact," and if brute facts on your end are to be allowed in this debate, then also allowed shall be the following brute fact: Theism is "just true," and the belief in atheist Dogma is "just false." Do you really want to allow brute facts in this debate? Because if you do, then you have admitted the facts that God is real, that Theism is true, and that the belief in atheist Dogma is a false belief system. Let me know if brute facts are allowed, and if they are not, then withdraw your above brute fact. "It in fact is not a brute fact, it is me saying that we did not get 2000 genders." It's not a fact, but it is brutish. " So do you disagree with what you previously said?" Nope. Saying that "GOD IS REAL" does not make it fact," I never made that statement, so that is nothing but an ignorant straw man logical fallacy on your part. When babies shart their pants, it is not carefully planned. Similarly, your argument is exactly as carefully planned as when a baby sharts in his pants. "At this point you are just using the Ad hominem fallacy" Poor kid -- you don't know what an ad hominem logical fallacy is! LOLOLOLOLOL "Chosen???" Chosen by whom? The Intelligent Designer? Thank you for your agreement and support, and God bless you! =) "Chosen by what we needed to survive where we lived" The above text is not even a sentence. "Choice" is a conscious activity, and it requires a living, conscious, and intelligent agent. Who is the conscious, living, and intelligent agent that you are positing as part of your argument when you assert "chosen?" The Intelligent Designer, of course! Thank you for your agreement and support, and God bless you! =) . Thank you for letting me make such a good clarification. No I didn't say that -- stop lying. "Yes, you did." No I didn't: You committed a straw man logical fallacy when you claimed that I did, and you also lied. Have you no shame, little girl??? "I rephrased it." Your rephrasing was YOUR statement, not mine. You claim that YOUR statement was mine, but that claim of yours was nothing but a lie and a straw man on your part. You are REALLY bad at this, little girl! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL "you are wrong." Without God, nobody could make an objective distinction between right and wrong. "The above statement is your faith-based religious BELIEF, not observable science. A belief has no evidence towards it," Exactly, and you have provided zero evidence for any of your foolish and ridiculous atheistic claims. "What I said has many studies conducted to prove evolution exists." No it doesn't. I never denied the existence of genders, dummy. "now you are just cherry picking what I say" No I'm not. The full thing I said was that the there could be genders through evolution" That statement is merely part of your faith-based religious belief system, not observable science. No it isn't. "evidence is all I will say to these any more." That is not even a sentence. Do you have a learning disability? (Serious question). Yes, it is all just your opinion because you failed to provide any evidence for any of your wild and ignorant claims. "I used logic" Without God, there could be no logic. You lost the debate, and you lost it HARD: Thanks for your time! =) "ignorance" Without God, nobody could make an objective distinction between wisdom and ignorance. "religion and fact" Without God, nobody could make an objective distinction between fact and falsehood. "faith and facts... facts..." Again, without God, nobody could make an objective distinction between facts and fictions.