Debate: Should mankind invest in the exploration of space?
Side: No

Those are not mechanisms. They are assertions with no depth behind them. Examples of mechanisms are evolution by natural selection, thermodynamics, genetics, etc. These all contain elaborately documented, tested and insightful mechanisms.Mechanisms aren't required when the creator is working outside of the universe. Just like the mechanisms for building a car aren't contained in the car itself. As for everything you mentioned, it's quite possible that God invented all of those things. Once again, like a car manufacturer builds the electrical and mechanical systems of a car--both are quite complex.Look up the burden of proof. It is the established position in science that life's needs are not unique to Earth. You are making a claim that negates this established position, and therefore must substantiate your claim.The burden of proof is still on you, and you have yet to supply it. All the exosolar planets I've heard and read about are quite different from Earth. The closest thing would be Kepler-10b, which is only 1.5 Earth radii, but the temperature of the surface is a sweltering 1833 K. The next might be COROT-7b at 1.5 Earth radii as well, and it's also around 2000 K, not to mention eight times as massive. And both of those not-close planets are around 500 light years away.Gliese 581 c and d are in that zone at their star, and the star is a mere 20.3 light years from us, out of a universe billions of light years across.Gliese 581 c has never been directly observed, but has more than 5 times the mass of Earth, and reports of atmospheric conditions cast doubt on habitability. 851 e is the closest to earth-sized, but it's far too close to the star.Ever heard of the Hardy–Weinberg principle? That's basic biology.Please enlighten me.You believe in an unproven, untestable, unfalsifiable assumption that uses magicIt's easy to say God uses magic as we can't understand Him. Just like the parts of the car probably think (if they were sentient) that the car manufacturing plant is magic, as there's nothing on the car that could do what the plant could do.The bible is not evidence of its own authoritativeness. This is obviously a violation of the basic rules of reasoning.And why not? Much of the Bible, especially the Old Testament, is history. Historical text. Normally historians love text that old that tells what happened. It's called 'primary source'. As for the parting of the Red Sea, it wasn't 'magic'. The Bible clearly states that God used wind to do it. And science has actually confirmed that under the right circumstances, wind can push water significantly. And there is enough water on Earth to completely cover the land--if the land was flattened a bit. Okay, a lot a bit. But what's to say the pre-flood Earth wasn't quite flat? Certainly something like a worldwide flood would change the landscape. Maybe the flood was what set the tectonic plates in motion, causing the modern mountains to rise up out of the water.You must be very young to use that word, "syfy" when it was always called "science fiction."There is a name for what you're doing. It's called Argumentum ad Hominem. Syfy is actuall a channel on TV. Judging by his grammar and writing skill, I'd say that he's actually a well-educated adult, or at least a well-educated young adult. I've noticed that you've made more spelling errors than he has.Anyway, I do not believe you have a foot to stand on after just telling me that you believe in zombies and magical floods.I've covered the 'magic' part. As for zombies, people raised from the dead aren't zombies. Zombies are mindless living-dead creatures. People God has raised are ex-dead people. In the New Testament, which is an amazing Primary Source, has recorded several people coming back to life through God's power. That you refuse to believe historical text is quite disappointing.