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

Everybody does look for different things. That's why I don't mind having a few religions around. But for me, this works. Usually people who think like me gravitate toward atheism. You are right, some people hate the idea of a world without a god. They will believe in god because it's comfortable and not because it makes perfect sense. But I do think that as time goes on, it doesn't bother people as much to think there isn't a god in the world. It's not so bad. There's so many other beautiful aspects to life. We don't need to have an afterlife to look forward to or some being to love us forever.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

But I do think that as time goes on, it doesn't bother people as much to think there isn't a god in the world. It's not so badI don't think the world willake it that far. The concept of god is the most crowd controlling force on Earth, and world leaders know it.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Exactly. So as long as people want to rule the world, they will use religion to control people instead of educate them to think for themselves. The more people think for themselves, the less they fall for these crowd controlling systems.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

Exactly. So as long as people want to rule the world, they will use religion to control people instead of educate them to think for themselvesI agree. It still doesn't prove God does not exist.What it does show is how the antichrist will rule the world with religion... as depicted in the Bible.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

You can't prove something DOES NOT exist. It's an intellectual fallacy. You can only show there is no evidence for it. The person making the claim of something existing has the burden of proof. You have to prove God exists to me, not the other way around. And the antichrist means nothing to me. Before you can spout the bible or the antichrist or anything, you need to show a foundation for all of it. That foundation is any shred of evidence in the known universe that there is a supreme being involved in the world. You have NONE.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

You can't prove something DOES NOT exist. It's an intellectual fallacy. I know. That's why Atheism doesn't seem an option to me.You can only show there is no evidence for it.I've offered you several things, including my site. If you ever want to see my sites, they are provided on my profile on this site.You have NONE.I do have some. That's why I provided you my sites. If you fully reject what I offer with no sense of hmmm..., it simply means you reject God from a nonintellectual position, such as hurt, disappointment, other.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Do you believe in the tooth fairy? Is not believing in the tooth fairy an option for you?And I started looking at your profile and couldn't find anything other than bible quotes and theories which I have made clear, mean nothing to me until the bible is shown as a credible source. When I say evidence, I mean anything outside of speculation. Like in this world. One shred of proof. Some sort of miracle perhaps? Some kind of correlation between prayer and god responding? Any commonality between god appearing in visions to people? There's gotta be something in this world that shows he exists. I mean it was pretty apparent that god existed in the bible with all the talking to people and miracles he performed. Even Jesus confirmed he was God during his lifetime (in the story).
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

Do you believe in the tooth fairy? Is not believing in the tooth fairy an option for you?In infinite space and time, there might be one per some sort of Darwinian means somewhere in deep space. It'd simply be a small humanoid who had evolved wings.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Lol well I can't argue with that answer. That's a pretty good answer. I think I believe in the tooth fairy now.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

And I started looking at your profile and couldn't find anything other than bible quotes and theories which I have made clear, mean nothing to me until the bible is shown as a credible sourceThere are actual links to sites on my profile.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

Usually people who think like me gravitate toward atheism.White males gravitate towards Atheism. The studies on "why" are rather interesting.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

I'm not a white male. The people who think like me part is referring to my education, desire for truth, and scientific literacy.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

Most atheists are white males. It's a cultural thing, not an intellectual thing. 8 of the 10 highest IQs on Earth are provablyy theist. The other 2 are just unknown. Prove me wrong.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

White males have the greatest access to education. They are the most likely to study sciences like physics and mathematics. People who study physics and mathematics see a clearer picture of the universe and see the inherent flaws in religious thinking. Here is a list of people with extremely high IQs. There are several known atheists on this list. I would guess most of the physicists and mathematicians on this list will gravitate toward a secular world view due to their education and environment. I do not see any highly religious people on this list. No Dalai Lama, No Jewish Rabbi, and definitely no Christian pastors or preachers. But there are leading atheistic minds on there.http://superscholar.org/smartest-people-alive/
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

8 of the 10 highest IQs on Earth are provably Theist. The other 2 might be. 8
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Where's your source? I gave you my source. I don't see yours.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

http://godfatherpolitics.com/10-highest-iqs-least-8-theists-least-6-christians/
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Ah I didn't see this earlier so my apologies. However it's funny how all of the sources for this particlular article don't exist. There is no web page for Examiner.com If you try to click on the links leading to the sources, it either goes to a ticketing service, or to some weird error page. I guess the author of the article doesn't expect his readers to check on his sources.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Also every source I went to mentions Stephen Hawking as one of the top contenders. I wonder why he is left out of a religiously biased site?
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

I don't know that this is or isn't true. I do know that my doctors and the scientists that I see on youtube typically aren't white.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Did you look at the list? I would say it was a pretty good mix of culture and gender. It was by no means dominated by the white male.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/06/01/10-facts-about-atheists/
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Did you read that? It definitely mentions the correlation between intelligence and atheism. It also shows a bunch of interesting stats like how most atheists don't confidently deny the possibility or a spiritual being or God and how most atheists don't discuss their belief with religious people.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

8 of the 10 highest IQs are provably theist. The other 2 may be theist. Should I believe a group of smart Atheists or 8 theists who are smarter than that group...
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Hello bront:Provably??? Nahh... They didn't ask me.excon
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

According to that christian website with shady sources and broken links?
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

I have no idea. I can't get to that part of the debate without weeding through a mile of our dialogue. You'll need to provide the link or I'll have no way to know or rebuttal.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Well I don't really care about the white part. That's a point you brought up. Race isn't a factor in my opinion.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

It's also my understanding that the U.S. isn't very high in education, and that when we need expertise or "brains" we import foreigners.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Many times we do. But that doesn't mean some of the smartest people don't come from the US. It also doesn't mean a foreigner is religious.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

That's a blanket statement. I know the US welcomes foreigners with high IQs but you can't say that there the highest IQs don't come from the United States. In fact, most of the foreigners prefer to study here. They get benefits if they do.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

It would also be a contradiction of alliances for God to ally Jews with Christianity and use Christians to defend the Jews if we were wrong. WW2 for example. If Jesus is correct, the alliances and protection makes sense.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Christians defended the Jews of their own accord. If the Jewish tradition is true, God didn't make the Christians do anything.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

It's easy to dismantle because it takes stories and concepts from Judaism and Christianity. In claiming the god of Abraham it is held to the Jewish account in the Torah that Ishmael's seed is not chosen. They claim to be, and are, Ishmael's seed. They also reject Jesus as the Son of God, so referencing Jesus' NT teachings and claiming he is a prophet of God becomes a contradiction of terms. It's why Muslims are the easiest group on Earth to convert to Christianity.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Okay but that all means nothing to me. I don't take the account of Abraham to be true anyway. Whether or not the fictional story verifies whose seed is "chosen" is irrelevant to me. They reject Jesus as god and follow the teachings of Muhammed. Both of these figures are equal in my eyes. I find no verification of Jesus being the true son of God anywhere. So in my eyes, they have an edge on Christianity in that sense. Christianity took its stories and concepts from Judaism so they are comparable in that sense. I am not sure about how easy it is to convert a Muslim, but I would assume if they are susceptible to one story, it wouldn't be difficult to fall for another.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

it might be. Another theory is that it might be something flawed in the gospel. The person might have noticed it isn't from the real godIf one wants to present an argument, they are welcome to. If they don't read Hebrew and Greek, it'd be an impossible assessment.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

So what you are saying is that in order to verify that the gospel is true, you need to speak a specific language? That's a pretty hefty challenge from a God who intentionally split up all the languages of people on purpose. Especially for those without access to education. Yet another example where God favors those with money in this life.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

So which denominations are you interested in discussing? *
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Which denomination are you ?
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

None. Which denomination would you like to discuss? *
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Do you go to church at all? You have to subscribe to some sort of beliefs.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

I do not attend regularly. From time to time I randomly show up to one of no particular handpicked denomination. Lol? Why do I have to subscribe? You don't. Are you magic wisdumb?
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Lol well I would like to be. I don't subscribe because there is nothing to subscribe to for an atheist. There's no laws or dogmas to follow. Christians on the other hand believe in a person who will judge them in the afterlife. So the nature of this person is very important because it will determine the state of their soul. There has to be an objective reality. Either something is real or it isn't. Either you should go to church or you shouldn't. You have to follow some set of laws in order to call yourself a Christian. I mean you study the bible so there's definitely something in there that tells you what you believe. I mean maybe you don't have to go to church, but you still need to have some sort of standards.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

Christians on the other hand believe in a person who will judge them in the afterlife. So the nature of this person is very important because it will determine the state of their soulSo how would you say the thief on the cross went about getting saved in the NT?
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Well if Jesus is right there it'd be nice to ask him to get to heaven. He's a lucky guy. If I met Jesus in person, I would ask to head straight to heaven too. Im sure there were plenty of other crucified thieves that weren't so lucky.But you know my real answer is why should I believe the story is real in the first place? You might as well ask me why I think the tortoise really beat the hare.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

But you know my real answer is why should I believe the story is real in the first place?Aaaah... Want a little adult psychology?Faith is really optimism. Lack of faith is really pesimisism.Pesismism causes anxiety and depression. Anxiety and depression kills people. You can choose your focus and alter your entire reality just by making a choice.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Faith is not optimism. The two are not necessarily correlated at all. Faith is belief without evidence. You could have faith in the devil or Baal or whatever you want. Lack of faith is not pessimism. I am not a pessimist. Nor am I depressed or anxious. In fact, I am quite content. That also has nothing to do with psychology. No psychologist would agree with you.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

Faith is not optimismIt can be. It depends on what you have faith in. I specifically mean faith that God exists, he loves me, and that I will live eternally. Faith is belief without evidence.I can have faith in the bridge because it has never fallen through before. This contradicts your claim.I am not a pessimist. Nor am I depressed or anxiousYou spoke earlier about calling out to God and getting no answer, etc. You didn't sound particularly happy or at peace. And now you appear anti god. I assume that wasn't brought on by peace, tranquilty, joy and/or happiness.That also has nothing to do with psychology. No psychologist would agree with youA psychologist would agree with me as to what it takes to fulfill the hierarchy of psychological needs.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Just because faith can give you optimism, doesn't mean it is optimism. If it makes you happy, that's fine. But believing that I am loved and that I will live forever without any good reason is not good enough for me. You can have faith in a crappy bridge. Just because it hasn't fallen yet, doesn't mean it won't fall.It was actually the faith that brought me to my pessimism initially. I had faith and it was not reconciled. My experience contradicts your claim. It wasn't until I lost my faith, that I found my joy. Plus I wouldn't say I am anti god. I have nothing against a god if he exists. I just want some proof. I have nothing against leprechauns either. And no they wouldn't. I'm not sure where you got those needs you mentioned, but it isn't from science. They might agree that those things make you feel more content, but I doubt they would agree that everyone needs them. But if you can find one that verifies that, you can prove me wrong. I just haven't been able to find it.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

But believing that I am loved and that I will live forever without any good reason is not good enough for me.You can have faith in a crappy bridge. Just because it hasn't fallen yet, doesn't mean it won't fall.I would definately call that pessimism.And no they wouldn't. I'm not sure where you got those needs you mentioned, but it isn't from scienceThe hierarchy of needs is a part of science. It is a part of psychology.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's hierarchyof_needsIt wasn't until I lost my faith, that I found my joyI've heard this somewhere before...And as he got older and closer to his expiration, that claim got tested, and his rhetoric kept morphing. I keep wondering if Christopher Hitchens (Atheist debate specialist) became the Prodigal Son.https://youtu.be/ma8X-mU4yMA
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

It's called realism. I don't want to walk across a bridge that looks like it'll fall. That's stupidity. Based on what I can see, there's no good evidence that the bridge will hold up. And I can't seem to find the paragraph in the debate where you brought up the needs, but I remember yours was quite different. It mentioned hope as one of them which is not on the list. Your list also mentioned nothing about physiological needs or safety. The list in your link is not the one I am refuting.I've seen that video before. Hitchens died an atheist as far as I can tell. Just because he mentions that he wouldn't remove religion from the world doesn't mean he's a convert. In fact if you remember, I agree with him. I think religion has it's place for certain people. I wouldn't want just one world view to dominate. I would want several because thats part of the beauty of culture. It doesn't mean I am a believer nor does it mean Hitchens is.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

I've seen that video before. Hitchens died an atheist as far as I can tell. Just because he mentions that he wouldn't remove religion from the world doesn't mean he's a convert. In fact if you remember, I agree with him. I think religion has it's place for certain people. I wouldn't want just one world view to dominate. I would want several because thats part of the beauty of culture. It doesn't mean I am a believer nor does it mean Hitchens isThe fine tuning argument will keep your thinking cap on, as it did his. It's what always nags in the back of the mind of the well informed Atheist.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

It brings up a good point, but it doesn't answer the question. It's suggesting the universe was made so that we could be here. But it doesn't address all the things working against us being here. In fact, most of the universe is uninhabitable by us and wouldn't be suitable for life at all. Also, since we have adapted to our environment through evolution, I would argue that if the earth was 1 foot closer to the sun, we would've adapted to a world that is 1 foot closer and not to the world we are on today. Of course the people alive today wouldn't survive on that 1 foot closer planet. They adapted to THIS planet.So you should really argue that we were fine tuned for the universe and not the other way around.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

It brings up a good point, but it doesn't answer the question. It's suggesting the universe was made so that we could be here. But it doesn't address all the things working against us being here. In fact, most of the universe is uninhabitable by us and wouldn't be suitable for life at all.I just watched you give a statement saying that what we see in outer space is history. It no longer exists. By that assessment all of that may simply be the past.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

I don't understand your point. Are you saying all of the stars don't exist anymore and our solar system is all that's left? Like that's how we know the universe was designed for us?Also, I never said it doesn't exist. I did say it is light from millions of years ago. Most of those stars still exist because they live for millions of years. We've only been here for a few thousand as human beings. We haven't even had a chance to look at the sky.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

So you should really argue that we were fine tuned for the universe and not the other way aroundNot really. It's a multi level fine tuning.1)It's almost uncomprehendable the amount of things that have to happen to get a universe of any kind at all.2)The odds are even worse that we would get a universe where planets or stars can exist.3)The odds are even worse than that, that we get a universe where any kind of life can exist.4)The odds are even worse than that, that we get a universe that can sustain any life that exists on Earth.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

1) You have no idea how difficult it is to get a universe. You know nothing of what makes a universe happen. I already made the point that atheists don't believe it came from "nothing". 2) Actually the odds are 100% that we get planets and stars. We only have one universe to go off of and it happened 1/1. 3) Life is a bit trickier to talk about. We could bring up the Drake equation which shows that it is very probable that there is more than one instance of life in this very universe. But I'll make the same argument I did in point 2. You only know of 1 instance of life so you don't know how difficult it is to make. So far it's 1/1.4) Life on earth adapted to Earth as I mentioned in the last argument. Life could easily have adapted to other environments. In fact we know of life that exists today that is adapted to extremely harsh environments. There's even life on Mars.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

we were fine tuned for the universeI agree fully. Anything else?
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

Glad you agree fully even though you disagreed in your last point. We adapted through evolution to our environment.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: No.

It's called realism. I don't want to walk across a bridge that looks like it'll fall. That's stupidity. Based on what I can see, there's no good evidence that the bridge will hold upIn this case you don't think there is a bridge. And if you did see a bridge, the fact you saw a bridge in the first place would be a refutation of your claim.
Debate: Is this universe created by solely natural processes?
Side: Yes.

The bridge isn't supposed to represent God. It was supposed to represent your claim being reality. Faith is walking across the bridge. I can see the bridge because I can hear your idea, not because I can see your idea is true or that god exists.