BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Literal Christian Creationism MUST be the truth.

"If God did that by speaking, does this mean he had vocal chords? And if so, how did God produce sound in space before he created air?" -- God is a supernatural being, the only way one could relate to another human would be by saying God spoke the words because it relates to us human, it would be the most convient and powerful way to created domething, just by speaking. "Where did God come from?" -- This is very simple, and you skeptic have very poor memory if you forget this. God has always existed because, for one God is spiritural not physical, that is parishy the difference between a physical and spiritual being. Secondly, God can have access to all dimensions. Such as the 10th dimension wihich allows one to see an infinity anoumt of ways which one may take, however to us humans we only witness the path we take, God can witness an infinity different way we could have taken. From a single point, that being God, others use the big bang as the centre spot but it doesn't make any sense as what was before the big bang? Silly really. "95,000 years ago, man behaved more like animals that relied mainly on nomadic hunting and gathering. This is scientific fact." -- Arn't we animals today? Kind of going back on your self there. You know we are not animals, or at least not anymore, because you are parted between acting decent to doing what you wish in life thus act animal like. You have given me no proof of your claim that it is scientific at all. None! I don't do links, I do not read them, I do not send them. Ok my case, that creation happened 6000 years ago. Firstly it is a belief, but scientific evidence points in it dircetion. The thing about evolution is that you take the whole thing as fact, and that no scientific evidence points to evolution. Funny huh? One piece of scientific evidence is that the eye could not have evolved and yet we have eyes today. An eyeball with out an retina would be a toumour not a possitive mutation passed on. An eyeball with out the lense would be only to see light as in you could see samples of light, not able to make out what you see at all. An eyeball with out a functioning optic nerve to pass messages to the brain would be worthless. An eyeball without the perfect balance of fluid pressure would explode or implode. An eyeball without a brain designed to interpret the signals would be sightless. (With help from drdino.com) It would be very unlikey that the eye could over come any of these tasts through mutation. In that if the first creature with some sort of an eye died and had no offspring, the chances of the eye to carry on would be near impossible. It does take a rocket scientist to figure it out. Fossils: If evolution is correct, there should be billions and billions of fossils, which are partly two types of creatures. This was what Darwin expected, but paleontologists have no found one over a 100 years of intensive searching. I have ran out of room. Next time though.
Literal Christian Creationism MUST be the truth.

***I shall begin my response by rebutting my opponent's points*** First and foremost, my opponent is either inconsistent, confused, or is having difficulty expressing his point. Please see these two quotes below: 1. "The creation of the universe was very simple. In the beginning God made the heavens and the earth, by speaking. " 2. "To say how God actually created the universe is beyond me, it would be like trying to explain how the universe works to a dustmite. " Which is it? I believe my opponent is simply confused himself and does not quite understand his own views. ***On with the other philosophical points*** "The creation of the universe was very simple. In the beginning God made the heavens and the earth, by speaking. " If God did that by speaking, does this mean he had vocal chords? And if so, how did God produce sound in space before he created air? "Maybe it is what caused the big bang, no the big bang was caused by this and this was caused by that. " Where did God come from? If God was always there, why can't this logic apply to the universe? And if it MUST have been caused, why is it the Christian God and not any of the thousands of other gods people believe in? ***And now, I shall rebutt my opponent's pieces of evidence for creationism*** "It took around 95,000 years for man to figure out that planting a seed in the ground produces food to feed your starving family. " 95,000 years ago, man behaved more like animals that relied mainly on nomadic hunting and gathering. This is scientific fact. "The Tower of Bable in Exodus…can you see how the Bible get straight to the point where as man's way does not and it never will either. " Most of the time, the simpler explanation is not the correct one, even though it is easier to understand. . http://en.wikipedia.org... . http://en.wikipedia.org... The scientific theory of languages changing geographically is visible even today. If we cannot explain something, we say we cannot explain it. We don't assume Christianity. If my opponent *must* have some sort of fairy tale to explain this, might I suggest any of the following half dozen other language myths? . http://en.wikipedia.org... "If the universe was billions of years old, the outer planets of our solar system should haved cooled off long ago, such as Jupiter and Saten. " This argument is so old and has been disproven so many times, it actually has an archived entry and an ID number. . http://www.talkorigins.org... "Oh and spontaneous combustion doesn't create life. Just kidding. " What about spontaneous creation? Just kidding. As I have extended forth the possibility of evolution, and my opponent has not debunked it, it remains a valid possibility, and thus, my opponent has not yet won.
Literal Christian Creationism MUST be the truth.

Thank you for another opportunity to bash evolutions' and the big bangs' skulls together. (Note: Many may diagree) I will probably lose this though because I do not believe in a convienent, sin excusable theory, whatever you can find, I bet you would change your belief from evolution to another theory if there was a more appropriate theory for sinning. Any how I will begin. Now I got that out the way. The creation of the universe was very simple. In the beginning God made the heavens and the earth, by speaking. It says man confessed to be wise and become fools. By trying to manipulate a clever and intelligent way to figure out how the universe began just that it will get you no where, as to ponder on and on, wondering where your final answer is. Maybe it is what caused the big bang, no the big bang was caused by this and this was caused by that. Getting absolutly no where, you may have well not have discovered anything new. Enough philosophy now. One piece of evidence for creation is that evolutionists claim that we evolved into humans from apes around 5 million years ago and became moden humans 100 thousand years ago. Yet main stream fossil researchers claim that human population only really took off around 5,000 years ago. By that this means it took around 95,000 years for man to figure out that planting a seed in the ground produces food to feed your starving family. In stead of the silly theory evolution of us evolving into many different types of humans with many languages (Which evolution still has not worked out, where language originatied from) The Tower of Bable in Exodus claims that God made those who were working and buliding on the tower to speak many different languages, can you see how the Bible get straight to the point where as man's way does not and it never will either. To say how God actually created the universe is beyond me, it would be like trying to explain how the universe works to a dustmite. But when it was main I do know. If the universe was billions of years old, the outer planets of our solar system should haved cooled off long ago, such as Jupiter and Saten. That are both gas planets and to say that over at least 5 billion years they have not changed from being gas generated is quite obsurde. Only in the last 200 years has the famous hurricane mark on Jupiter appared which was 3 time the size of earth, I would expect Jupiter to have many more bruses than that. If it has been around for billions of years. It is like this, say there was a cigar and which was alight, you wouldn't say the cigar has been there for billions of years but have only recently lite up in smoke, but rather a man lite the cigar and it has been there as long as the men has left it. Not long either since it takes a number of minutes for a cigar to burn away. Oh and spontaneous combustion doesn't create life. Just kidding. I will reply more serverely once I have an idea, I find it easiler to reply back to a response.
Literal Christian Creationism MUST be the truth.

I thank both the audience and my opponent for participation in this debate. My opponent intends to prove that literal interpretation of the Bible sums up the pure truth of how the universe and man came to be, and that it can be no other way. I shall be rebutting my opponent's points and responding with scientifically backed views on possibilities other than the one my opponent proposes. I will allow my opponent to begin his argument, extending forward the entirety of Evolutionary theory for him to debunk.
Literal Christian Creationism MUST be the truth.

Look creation is a belief and the reason is because the world works towards the notion of evolution being scientific. Any proof I offer to you, you will always 'debunk' it. I will post you a non biast message on why evolution and creation is equally logical depending on your veiw of life. Why can you not send quotaions? Your 2nd point looks to me as a guess, sure coments around the sun but if they collided together that would mean they loose mass and become smaller. You evolutionists have this problem where you think that time makes thing improve, it is quite the opposite. Not quite. The 3rd point here, in that you speak of light traveling for millions and millions of light years. Scientists now know from Estines c=mc2 that light is not a constent, that is the speed of light. Scientists now think that light travelled hundreds of thousands of times faster than today's speed. The speed of light today is roughly 670,616,629.4 mph and it takes 8.3 minutes to reach the sun. Imagen 670,616,629.4 x 2,000,000 its actually would equal around 134,123,325,880. I was being generous, the law of 2nd law of pharmadynamics affects everything. It would be silly to think light speed was the only thing that was not affected. There is another solution to this, in that light travel is not as simple as what you think. Say if I was to travel to NY from London, I leave at 5am and I arrive at 5am. This is called universal time, it also effects space travel. I will have to look into this some more. It is easy to say that the Golden ratio works in a constent way, and then you leave it at that, that is easy to suggest. Your probably right, but it is also silly to think that these laws made from pure nothingness, pure nothingness didn't make these laws, God did. As simple as you say these things exist is as how simple as it is for God to creation these laws. Please, if you can, do not sin and say the things you say. I will then believe every word you speak. Your 8th point I do not understand? I will just leave this behind as a finishing line. "Atheists believe life from non-life, intelligence from non-intelligence, morality from non-morality...and they criticize our faith!?" - Creation Science Evangelism. That sums them up.
Literal Christian Creationism MUST be the truth.

My opponent asserts that my beliefs are ludicrous and based on that, my arguments are false. This is an ad hominem fallacy. In addition, my opponent has provided no argument for Creationism, nor has he provided an argument against Evolution that I have not completely debunked. Thus, his entire opening statement is void, and nothing but angry and empty accusations. As for my opponent's rebuttals: 1. Included in that link is a huge list of meteor craters and discoveries, as well as geological explanations for their rarity. It is plain that my opponent has not viewed my sources. 2. My opponent's ignorance of physics is responsible for this fallacy. Comets have orbits around the sun, and collide with material along their orbit, gaining mass. Not gravitation, collision. 3. My opponent shot himself in the foot with desperate arguments he doesn't understand. My opponent says that since galaxies are millions of light years away, our interpretation of their image may be false. In that case, I ask my opponent how he knows they are still spiral. If he can see a galaxy millions of light years away, it means we are receiving light from a source millions of years ago, and not 6000 years ago like my opponent believes. In addition, this counterargument has absolutely nothing to do with my argument. My opponent then awkwardly mentions the golden ratio when I myself have not. He assumes that the golden ratio implies design when in reality, it is just a physically stable ratio. All it shows is that the rules of physics work in constant ways, not God. My opponent continues, making more unjustified claims that it is inmpossible for God not to exist. Since there is no corresponding argument, I take this as a restatement of his thesis. He does not support this claim, merely repeats it. My opponent then says that his unaddressed point about Jupiter and Saturn, which he included as evidence and which I debunked, is conceded. Then, my opponent concludes by saying that because I am a sinner, what I say cannot be true. This is another ad hominem fallacy. This is the final round, and my opponent, being the contender, should not introduce new arguments in the final round. In addition, he still has not responded to my list of unresolved issues, from the round before this. I also add the following unresolved issue: 8. You argue that speaking is the simplest action. Thinking is simpler, thus, you are wrong. Until my opponent resolves these eight issues, then his argument is not even PLAUSIBLE. He then has to debunk all of evolutionary evidence, and then make his argument in one response. It is clear that this is impossible because my opponent is supporting a desperate point based on faith and not on Science. It is a sad attempt to use bad science, poor logic, and ignorance of Evolution to appeal to easy answers. All his points have been debunked.
Literal Christian Creationism MUST be the truth.

God spoke and there was everything, you look at God's work in disgrace or at my belief's and see them as impossible. How can you when you do not take a glimpse at your own jokable and outrageous belief system? For a start you do not know any orgins of your theory, in that you base you whole argument upon nothing, then you marvel at how silly sounding God is. Your whole theory is floating on nothingness. It has no base, no orgins, no evidence and when you don't believe in creation and God, it is suddenly not a belief anymore. Because of these thing I tell anyone there is no reason to believe in evolution big bang etc. You question is simply, did God speak? Yes, God can speak to people now, there is no reason why God couldn't then either. Since you do not believe in God, this will appear quite unappealing. It is like jumping on thin air to you. You will continuly disagree in till you believe there is really a God. 1. No evidience on his reply. 2. How do comments gain matter when the gavity pull is weaker than the suns? 3. Galaxies are millions of light years away. It is quite possible that they look much different than they do now. In that they look new as they were made by God 6000 years ago. The fact that they inherit the Golden Ratio of God's unique handly work and alike many other clear works of God such as waves and the bottoms of pineapples, twisters and sea shells. It is quite strange how these all have the exact patten of the Golden Ratio. There are many other examples too. You then now go on to reason in that God can not have just done it. Well this is quite unfair, in your logic you can call what ever caused the universe anything what sounds scientific but anything but God. God created the universe as God is God. That is the very bottom line and it is mentally impossible to suggest and go any futher than what I just have. Rather than 'I don't know' This question leads to things which are large in detail and are hard to miss, not in the same case as God. In the same way I would ask you how much a rock weight without enabling t lift it in any manner. That list you presented I said my part and moved on. If you want a debate of Jupiter and Saturn you are always welcome. This is about creation. It is also down to the reader to deside who should be give a vote. Not each other. Talkorigins.org is a anti creationist website. To convince me that any evolution or anti creation website is trustworthy no one who is a atheist or who believes in evolution needs to not have sinned in my eyes. According to the Bible. Then I will allow Kleptin to win this.
Literal Christian Creationism MUST be the truth.

My point on God speaking has not been countered. It is not whether he could or could not, the question is, why speak it in existence when you can think it into existence? Human anthropomorphism of God is not trustworthy. Either the Bible is 100% literally interpreted, or it is not. You are saying the latter. I will now address your arguments. Please see this "handbook". http://www.talkorigins.org... 1. This argument is defeated in explanation #4. Meteor fossils and craters become indistinguishable after millions of years. My opponent is completely wrong and his argument is a blind shot in the dark. 2. This argument is defeated in explanation #3. There have been observed clouds of mass that comets pass through, picking up material from space. Comets gain matter as well as lose matter. 3. This argument is defeated here: http://pseudoastro.wordpress.com... My opponent then states that scientists choose incomprehensible explanations over the simple ones of "God did it". It is not their choice. It is experimental data. I must remind my opponent that higher knowledge becomes devoid of analogy, and that the simple answer may not be correct. Unless he believes flies come from fruits. My opponent then suggests the incredulity of the universe as a first cause and accuses me of bias. I now point to his bias, and suggest he not use ad hominem arguments where logic would be more accessible. To reframe, I will now list all the arguments/counterpoints that my opponent has purposely chosen not to respond to: 1. You said that the origin of the universe is simple, yet, it is also difficult to understand. This is a contradiction you have not addressed. 2. Why must the first cause be supernatural? And as a matter of fact, why must it be the Christian God and not any other God or deity, or even an indescribable force? 3. I countered your argument on Agriculture and early human nomads. You ignored it. 4. I countered your argument on the development of language. You ignored it. 5. I countered your argument on the cooling of Jupiter and Saturn. You ignored it. 6. I countered your argument on the evidence of fossils. You ignored it. 7. I countered your argument on the evolution of the eye. You ignored it. In addition, I have offered counterarguments for the three NEW arguments you have made just prior. I will suggest that my opponent read all of the following before making new arguments I will debunk and that he will subsequently not respond to. This index not only provides more evidence for the points I listed above, but also address possible counterpoints. http://www.talkorigins.org...
Literal Christian Creationism MUST be the truth.

Right on I go... You have told me that because I said speaking, you assume that I meant in words, that well could have happened indeed so. God is a supernatural being and there would be little to suggest what would not allow God to speak out words. When in Geneisis it speaks about the Holy Spirit moving across the waters before the earth had form I take that literally. I take all of Geneisis as it is said. Noah's flood helps one understand Geneisis clearer, in that if you take the globle flood literally then evolution did not occur so creation must be true. There are a number of strong proofs of a young earth. 1. Under layers of rock there are very few meteor crator, to match the aussmed age of the earth by evolutionists, there should be millions of crators. Actually the amount matches a earth being much nearer 6000 years old. 2. If earth was 4.6 billion yeas old, all known comets which orbit the sun should have had burned up thier material with each time they pass around. Their maxium life span is no more than 100,000 years. Why they are still about just proves earth to be less that time. 3. Spiral galaxies should have long lost their spiral formation. Also the off balanced dispersion of matter in the universe should be no longer. Many astronemors and cosmologists working on the idea that the universe is 10's of billions of year old have only squandered at these problems. Their precon assumptions have resulted in complicated and abnormal turn outs. Their only solution is transient phenomena based. Quick to exist and quick to stop existing. These explanations are far more faith bound than scientific. It is almost you suggest the universe being everlasting in the midsts of creations. It is almost how you presive the creation of a 6000 year old universe to be. In that you do not believe it, yet you do exactly that when these problems show up in your little closed minded world. For example of that closed mindness you inherit: We believe that after death we will either go two places, you think there is none. Say you lived in one of those circumstances where something appears in and out of existence with a flash. You would not understand the universe around you nore would you believe in anything else but what has just appered in to existence. Neither would you understand how you came into existence. But you would only conclude that a God or some extra intelligent being formed this sudden existence. It says in the Bible that this universe will end in a bang. Just like something disappearing from existence. As a belief in there being no God, it makes this whole debate to to be inlogical to you. For one you have the problem on where the universe came from, and if you can not figure it out, there is no reason to believe you, in evolution or there being no God. You are being subborn as you could imagen if you made something that can appear in and out of existence it would believe you never made anything. I am out of ammo.