Debate: is god true?
Side: no ,god is not true

"Sorry it's taken me so long to respond, I'm getting somewhat busy."No worries. Now that school is back on, you can count on my own responses being shorter and farther between. "However, I must just point out that just because previous things that were believed to be examples of irreducible complexity were proven wrong doesn't mean that there is no such thing."That is true. And as I said, one could say the cell is open to debate, although that is mostly because we don't have a complete lineage for cells yet. What we do know is that the earliest cells were extremely simple, and if they were anything like we think they were, there is nothing irreducible about them. For now, irreducible complexity is resigned to being purely speculative, and should be treated as a hypothesis (not a scientific theory since strong supporting evidence has yet to be found), and not a fact. "The Moral Law is cannot be a developed instinct or learned attitude as it has appeared in the exact same way in all history in all places in all the world."Not true. The only five precepts of morality that are currently known to be universal are identified as fairness, harm (or rather, unwillingness to do harm), loyalty (to an in-group, such as your family or nation), authority, and purity. There may be others that turn up as research continues, but for now these make a good (and testable) outline of morality. Also, each of these qualities have been observed in other animals, especially our relatives, the primates. Furthermore, the behaviors of brain damaged subjects show that it is purely related to brain functioning, while twins-separated-at-birth studies show a genetic connection. The thing is, the strength of each of these spheres varies from person to person. The article I linked to shows that liberals and conservatives prioritize these spheres differently. Also, cultures in different geographical regions prioritize these values differently. Purity (identifying things as "impure" and staying away from them. This could include urine and feces, foul smelling food, and less obvious concepts like certain colors or numbers or getting tattoos) is the least emphasized value in Western cultures, while it plays a huge part in Asian and African traditions and religions. Think about it, diseases in Africa and Asia are notably nastier and harder to contain than in Europe and North America, so purity would be a more useful survival adaptation to Asians and Africans. Time appears to have an effect too. Fairness seems to be much more important to us now than just a few hundred years ago (when slavery was a global business and women couldn't hope for equal rights anywhere.) And even though all cultures have provisions against killing, all cultures also have exceptions to this rule, and these exceptions have gradually decreased over time. When the Bible was written, capital punishment for minor offenses was the norm all around the world. Now, the US is the only secular, first-world nation that still uses capital punishment (and even here it is quite rare) and some foreigners consider us barbaric for still doing so. So yeah, we all have a sense of right and wrong, and it is based on at least 5 central foundations, but to say that morality "appeared in the exact same way in all history in all places in all the world" is not true. The basics are still there, and each of the foundations have evolutionary advantage, but there is a lot of wiggle room. "Moral Law causes guilt when we disobey it, and this is not a physical hindrance, like hunger."Guilt is a little harder to pin down, although since strong emotions such as depression, joy and anger have been linked to chemicals, it is likely that guilt is a physical in origin, it just doesn't feel that way because it is an emotion. In one of his two theories of guilt, Freud argued that it is instilled in us by our parents: we fear a loss of love when we displease them. Proponents of this theory suggest that as we grow into adulthood, our fear of losing our parent's love may broaden to society in general. Although religious thinking teaches us that guilt stems from conscience, Freud implied that it was actually the other way around. Considering horror stories of how people act when they think nobody is looking, or how violent gangs appear in poor neighborhoods all around the world (conscience becomes less necessary, perhaps even detrimental, when your closest friends are themselves immoral; morality becomes a possible hindrance when you are starving to death) this seems to have some merit. How, or even if, this relates to the foundations of morality is something I'm not ready to comment on."Have you ever written a story?"Yes. Quite a few actually. Why?"I'm working on gathering evidence of various branches"Good. That's how I like to work, so be as diverse as you wish.