azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

In order to say this, you need to make a lot of assumptions about life. First of all, our own radio waves have only gone out about 110 light years out. They have barely reached the closest stars to us. How could something detect we are here unless it is within 100 light years? Even if they could see the light coming from our planet, that light would be millions of years old. The earth would look like a planet with very primitive life on it to any intelligent species. Perhaps some of the planets we can see already have intelligent life, but we are millions of light years away and can only see what they looked like then. You also have to assume these aliens have the same exact ears as us. They would need to hear at the same frequency and sound range in order to interpret the waves as anything intelligent. Otherwise it would literally just be noise. We don't even try to decode every radiation wave that comes toward our planet. Perhaps there are aliens trying to communicate, but we are too stupid to interpret it at our level. You also have to assume that we would recognize life elsewhere. We haven't even discovered what is in our own oceans here on planet earth. We discover new species all the time on our own planet. There was a recent experiment where a scientist discovered that the bacteria in every person's belly button is completely unique. They even discovered new species there! So if we don't even know what is in our own belly buttons, how can we possibly say we know anything about life on other planets. Belly Button Article
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Good thing for scientist discovering bacteria in the belly button but completely failing on Climate Change !
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Lol that's a big claim. But this isn't the climate change debate. It's the universe by natural processes debate. I would gladly take you on that one though.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

How can we possibly say for sure there is no God?Are you starting to get it now? You are so quick to believe scientific theories that you yourself say we have no clue of what we are seeing.Yet when it comes to the possibility of God, you call it all fairy tales and myths.Maybe if scientists also spent a little time exploring the possibility of God instead of trying to disprove God's existence with their predetermined theories, they might learn something.They are doing what scientists are not suppose to do. They are suppose to explore all possibilities with no preconceived opinions or theories.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

First, I never said with certainty that there is no god. But I have no god reason to believe in one. I look at evidence first and then make my decision. There is good evidence for natural processes. There's fossils, a migration record, DNA, vestigial forms, an explanation for each and every element on the periodic table, etc. What is the evidence for a designer? The goldilocks argument? Bible quotes? The Fermi paradox? How come I can go to a museum and see hundreds of fossils showing ancient dinosaurs, million year old creatures, and transitional forms? But if I ask for evidence for a designer, I get handed a bible? Or i get a speech on how everything is a lie? There should be more than that. Scientists don't just make stuff up and then try to prove it. That's what religion does.If it was true, then we would have obvious clues around the world. But there arent. There's unanswered questions. Like where are the miracles today that used to be so abundant? Or when you look at the DNA of all creatures, why does it make a giant tree? Why are there dinosaurs that died off? If Adam and Eve are real, how did genetics make different races? Why do we breathe out of the same place we swallow food? Why do men have nipples? Why do we have an appendix? What is mutation? Why do monkeys look just like us? One side has a pretty good explanation for all of these questions. The other side says idk god works in mysterious ways.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

You sit there asking a thousand questions why God made men and animals the way he did? Who on Earth cares why he did what he did. Someday you can ask him. Why would you find it so strange that God made man with traits similar to women or the animals he created?There is much evidence out their to God's word being true. Do you ever watch the Smithonian channel? They just recently did an entire show with much scientific evidence that the plagues from God upon Egypt actually happened during the exact historic Biblical time frame. They even have trees that are thousands of years old, and when you look at the growth rings during the time of the plagues, you could see much smaller ring growth.They went into depth on each plague and evidence to it happening during that time.The Bible does speak to God creating different races of people with different languages.Funny, these are not the non answers from Christians you eluded to but I'm sure it matters not to you.Ask the same thousands of questions to scientists and evolutionists.Why did one cat evolve with speed to catch his prey while other cats developed stealth, camoflaug, teamwork, etc. to catch their prey.Why did only Girraffes evolve long necks to reach the higher branches to survive while other animals survived without long necks.Why are we not swimming in missing links since there should be entire civilizations of those missing links.If dinosaurs evolved before the supposed meteorite that killed them off, why did they not evolve once more afterwards?How did the unbelievable complexity of man's DNA just randomly evolve in such a short time while being stopped in it's tracks from killer asteroids many times.Why did apes stop evolving while other apes supposedly became man.WHERE IS THIS LIFE FROM BILLIONS OF GALAXIES, BILLIONS OF YEARS OLDER THAN US! Your answer is that evolution works in mysterious ways. LOL, you just can't see your own bias against the possibiity of a God, and the lack of evidence proving your beliefs of where we came from.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

I think its funny that you say "who cares" when faced with legitimate questions. All of these questions have evidence based answers. The evidence just doesn't align withyour world view. But ya who cares? And a few of those questions you asked do have answers. Giraffe necksAlso, no animals stop evolving. And we didn't come from the apes that are here already. We share a common ancestor. And we have plenty of links to look at. You can't expect for every single fossil from every species that's existed to be found. First, we haven't even studied all of the animals currently on the planet. Second, fossils are extremely rare and difficult to form. It has to be the perfect conditions to make a fossil. Some animals can't even be fossilized due to their chemical make up.How many stars and galaxies do you think we've actually had the chance to look at? Think we've pretty much checked everything out by now? We just got started this century. You can't rely on a god of the gaps. Just because we don't have the answer yet doesn't mean "god did it".
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

I will say for the last time......WE HAVE NOT RECEIED ONE SIGNAL, RADIO WAVE, OR ANY OTHER SIGNS OF LIFE FROM THESE BILLIONS OF SOLAR SYSTEMS!!!!!!!You don't have to study or look at any galaxy. The proof of life woud be in the radio waves traveling the speed of light for billions of years from our closest galaxies as well as further our galaxies.We would be swimming in radio waves and other signals of life from the universe. We have the technology to listen to signals whether they be on our frequency or not. We know the difference between noise and a signal.I REPEAT... it is impossible not to have listened to evidence of life in these billions of galaxies. I've got bridge to sell you and it is real nice.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Hello From:Nahhhh... Our radio signals haven't reached even the nearest galaxy. So, if there's life there, and they made the same assessment you did, they'd be WRONG.. How do you explain that?excon
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

WHAT A WASTE OF TIME YOU ARE!These galaxies are billions of years older than we are. Their signals have been traveling for billions of years. Morons are trying to say that the signals from millions of our nearest galaxies would not have reached us yet? LOLIGNORE!
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

We have all kinds of cosmic rays coming at us. You act like you already know these aliens. Like you know exactly what to look for. Just think of how many radio stations we have on planet earth. You have to tune to an exact frequency to hear any of them. You assume aliens would actually use radio waves for Communication. Why is that a given? Radio waves are a small part of the entire electromagnetic spectrum. Who is to say which part these particular aliens use for communication if any at all? You have to assume they hear sound, that sound has to be at the same frequency, range, and speed as ours. They have to communicate like we do, or have some sort of audible language. So not only would they have to have ears, but brains like ours as well. And we have to recognize it as a language. We have to find the frequency, range, and scale. Mind you that radio waves are on the same spectrum as light. And we know light stretches as it travels long distances (its called redshift). So by time any signals at a certain range travel far enough, the signal would be distorted. Plus we know the majority of stars are billions of light years away. Anything we pick up is from a long time in rhe past. There would be no back and forth conversation to confirm their existence. And to top it all off, we have been looking for it for less than 100 years. You think its impossible not to? Do you even know what that process looks like? Who does the searching? What instruments do we use? Where is the funding for these projects?You are incredibly arrogant. You come from a self important species that thinks it is the pinnacle of life. How many species are on this planet? How many of them would you consider intelligent? Look at the plethora of ways life has developed in this planet alone. We find that there are different forms of life in each individual's belly button. In fact, weve discovered new life forms there. Do you think you know what is here? You think you understand this reality? Have we answered most the big questions in science and got it all figured out? Well Ive got a bridge to sell you. Its incredibly naive to think we know what lies out there in the universe. It is unfathomable to us as a species. We are nothing. We are not chosen by a god to be special amongst all other life. We are mold.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

AS ALWAYS, A TOTAL WASTE OF TIME.I told you science can discern the difference between noise and an intelligent signal. It does not have to be a signal we have ever seen or understand. A signal has a repeating pattern that distinguishes it from noise.IGNORE!
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

LOL You're right it is a waste of time. You have a thick skull. Even with the explanation, you still cling to an argument like you know everything about aliens. You will never grow until you listen with open ears.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

There is good evidence for natural processes. There's fossils...When I was younger, I always asked "where are the billions of transitional intermediaries in the fossil record that it would take to get from simple to human"? It was a fair question, but Richard Dawkins gave the best response I had heard, and it stuck with me. He said there aren't giant strings of intemediaries because getting fossilized is like hitting the lottery. It's nearly impossible but does happen. That made me realize that if the process only happened on rare occassion if almost never, all the fossils are probably from one, maybe 2, or perhaps 3 events that caused fossilization. If this is true the illustrations of chains of intermediaries must be false per deductive reasoning, and the fossil record is useless to give any chain of intermediaries.The other point is that if it took billions of intermediary changes to get from Cambrian simple organisms to humans, the Cambrian was "300 million years ago", and darwinism is a "slow process", how did we get billions of intermediary changes in 300 million years? It would take a plethera of mutations and bodily enhancements every single year to get from simple to human with that math.The third point is, if the fossil record IS meaningful in any way, the Cambrian explosion is quite a puzzling mystery if darwinism is:1)True.2)Is a slow process.3)Rarely happens but happens slowly over hundred of millions of years.4)If the time models of "prehistoric creatures" is correct, after the "mass extinction event"(comet, ice age, etc), Darwinism now has to start over and begin the process with even less time than 300 million years to get billions of intermediary changes neccessary to get from simple to human, which only confounds the probelm intellectually.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

Perhaps some of the planets we can see already have intelligent life, but we are millions of light years away and can only see what they looked like thenIt's possible that almost nothing we view that is far away is current or even exists anymore.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

It's definitely evident that everything we see far away is a glimpse of the past. However based on our knowledge of how long stars and planets hang around, I would say most of the stuff we see is still there but not all of it. It's not that things don't exist anymore, but we could definitely be seeing the light from a star that has already gone supernova.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

For me, and I would assume countless millions of others, the glaring flaw is the, so far, unsatisfactory explanation of how the so called, 'big bang' occurred.From where did the energy source originate to create this gargantuan explosion which is still sufficiently strong to continue to expand the universe into a conveniently existing space.From where did this space come?We're being asked to believe that this eruption of epic proportions came from nothing.Nothing from nothing = nothing.Nothing plus nothing=nothing, and so forth.When we are provided with indisputable and understandable scientific evidence which proves conclusively how and why the 'big bang' happened then all reasonable people will accept what the scientists have proven to us.In the meantime there will be, at best scepticism surrounding the 'big bang' claims, and at worst, total disbelief.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Hello A:If you found pieces of, let's say, an oil tank scattered over a couple square miles, you could extrapolate from that evidence, that the tank EXPLODED.. By observing the galaxies moving AWAY from each other, one can extrapolate from that evidence, that the universe EXPLODED..exconPS> Ok, you can call me liberal filth now...
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

Hi E, Based on your hypothetical scenario, yes I would arrive at that logical conclusion.But old bean, the big difference is that I would recognize the fragments of an oil tank and wouldn't have to wonder from where they originated. Going out for a scone and a coffee just now, I'll get back to you, cheers.Continued;- Well here I am back from the Bride-well cafe in Donaghadee.Hope you can appreciate the difference in the two story-lines.One is an easily recognisable tangible piece of everyday equipment while the other is an unproven, if not unprovable fanciful hypothesis.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Ok because I utterly curious about odd things......what kind of scone and coffee? I'm hungry. BUT. I do agree with you. The debris, oil residue, scorch marks and so on would lead one to speculate an explosion which could be a logical conclusion. The next step would be to wonder why it was there, what caused the explosion and how it all originated to begin with. Which, I think, are questions many religious persons believe are answered with the existence of a Creator or God.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Well, today I had a heated walnut and date scone with butter melting through it and an exceptionally good Americano coffee whilst I enjoyed ''the craic'' with my gym buddies.Yes, your analogy of the oil tank is quite good, but has one weakness.We all know what an oil tank is. It's scattered fragments would cause some curiosity and speculation but in Northern Ireland the reason for an exploding oil tank would be attributed to the I.R.A.Hey, do you think the 'Big Bang'' may have been the work of rival celestial terrorist groups warring over an interplanetary turf dispute? ha. Only a wee joke.Seriously though, I feel that religion is a non starter and the ''jury is still out'' on the big bag theory.''Maybe some day all will be made clear, but I doubt it will in my lifetime. Oiche mhaith, and may your God go with you.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

do you think the 'Big Bang'' may have been the work of rival celestial terrorist groups warring over an interplanetary turf dispute?Lol what you think of as a wee joke could be an AWESOME Scifi book.That scone sounds amazing.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Hello again A:The evidence leads me to believe that there WAS an explosion.. I'd say it was natural simply because it happened. I didn't say WHY it happened, though.. I dunno IF there IS a reason. Does there have to be?excon
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

My skepticism is based on the a number of flaws in the whole concept of the big bang theory.1) And here I repeat myself, from where did the energy originate that generated such an enormous explosion?2) Who or what created the micro sized dot from which all the immense cosmos materialized?3) What was the entity which engineered this speck of colossal energy doing prior to the wonderment of all we see around us and in the heavens? 4) How can something spontaneously materialize from nothing?5) No one has ever disproved the scientific fact that something can come from nothing.So, once again, until there is crystal clear, indisputable evidence of how the ''big bang' occurred I will not accept the scientist's assertion as a rational theory to explain the existence of the cosmos.We criticise the religious freaks for their mindless blind faith then the scientists ask us to do the same with their, so far, unproven theory.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

The whole point, Frijole, isn't about where the oil tank came from. Its about the explosion. If you saw an oil tank in fragments, you couldn't know what the cause of the explosion was. You would only know that it exploded. Thats the analogy.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

So if two oil tankers are traveling in opposite directions away from each other, it proves they were touching each other back to back before they were traveling away from each other?If I extrapolate that the two tankers were touching each other, isn't that a leap of faith?
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

By observing the galaxies moving AWAY from each other, one can extrapolate from that evidence, that the universe EXPLODEDOr that it's being pulled towards something else's gravitational pull...Or that negative and positive magnetisms are pushing and repelling things away from each other...
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

From where did the energy source originate to create this gargantuan explosion which is still sufficiently strong to continue to expand the universe into a conveniently existing space.Energy cannot be created or destroyed, only changed in form. It didn't "originate" anywhere. The big bang was a change in form, that's all. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. The antrhopic principle. When energy is compacted into smaller and smaller areas, its properties fundamentally change. What we know as the universe, is a form of stuff. Stuff can have other forms under other circumstances, and asking us to know exactly what they were like, is like asking the question: "what would another existence be like if it wasn't like this existence?"There are an infinitesimally small number of stupid questions, but this is one of them. From where did this space come?Space is just a way of saying "distance between objects". The distance between objects increases as time goes by. We're being asked to believe that this eruption of epic proportions came from nothing.Nothing from nothing = nothing.Nothing plus nothing=nothing, and so forth.Preposterous. No scientist will speak about the big bang in these terms. We already know nothing doesn't come form nothing. See my first point.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

Quoting schoolboy psychics explains nothing.Most people fell out of the pram whilst learning about your juvenile quote of energy cannot be created or destroyed, only changed.Even the dog's in the street knew that since they were pups.This scientific fact only goes to strengthen the case against ''the big bang theory. What was the original energy source which changed to cause the ''big bang''? You really are an embarrassingly naive twit who contributes nothing to such a debate.The points raised by me were legitimate weaknesses in the arguments for the big bang theory.If what you say is correct and scientists know that nothing comes from nothing then let them explain the composition and location of the original energy source.Even give us all a clue.You're the typical shithead who knows nothing and wants to share your ignorance with everyone else.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

You do a really good job of acting like a cunt of fantastic verbage, without actually saying anything, you substance-less, frail, flimsy little fruitcake.I defer to Steven Hawking.http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Lol you think you sound smart but everybody else looking at this thinks you are a dumbass. The points you raise are backed by no evidence whatsoever. Scientists don't know what happened before the big bang. That doesn't mean anything. NOBODY knows what happened before the big bang. You can't ask somebody to prove they understand every aspect of the universe and think that if they don't it proves your point right. You don't have a leg to stand on.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

There is also this to consider. Space and time cannot exist without the universe. In fact, Einstein proved that they are part of the fabric of the universe. Having said that. Where and when did the Big Bang happen, if there was no time or space?