Debate: Should mankind invest in the exploration of space?
Side: yes

Planets are common, yes. But still, as of yet, we haven't found another earth-like one. The indirect evidence is statistical math, which also fails to apply to casinos and weather.Again, if you have cause to believe that Earth is unique, I implore you to share it.I'll accept it when there's evidence to do so. As of right now, there is none. So it seems that you're more based on faith (at least in this regard) than I am.Like I said, the indirect evidence is overwhelming. Also you never made a case for the Earth being unique.How is that emotional evidence? It's bleedin' physical! Did you even read what I said?Sorry, I meant emotional justification. I misspoke.You're arguing that the supernatural doesn't exist. I give an example that cannot be explained naturally. Fifty-five pound bags cannot weight 45 pounds. That's a fact. But it did. That's physical evidence for a supernatural.The supernatural is by definition beyond the scope of the natural. Nothing natural can justify it because it does not play by the laws of nature, and in some definitions (which I despise), logic itself.Same goes for paint bubbling out of the ground. None of it is emotional. It's physical.Sounds like you just don't want to accept that.Paint on the ground inexplicably, or unusually heavy bags, do not follow into god. It simply doesn't follow.No. The Constitution of the US provides set rules with which to rule a country. In the 200+ years we've been doing so, there have been dozens of views on how to interpret the document. These views are not originated by those that wrote the constitution, but are the product of people since that time.Correct. We know that because they left around extra-constitutional evidence of themselves. This is not the case with the bible.But that doesn't mean that the Constitution, or it's writers, are a product of people since it was written. If I suddenly decided that those who wrote the Constitution didn't exist, that it was written by people in the early 1900s, than there would be no external evidence for them. I could easily discredit everything written about them as just being fantasies of a confused culture. Nobody talks to them nowadays, thus severing all evidence.That is because there is evidence of them outside the constitution. If nobody knew of them outside of it, your questioning would be justified.Except God does talk to people today. Imagine if you will you were able to take pair of HAM radios, some battery packs for power, and a buddy, back to the 1400s. Your buddy goes off somewhere, but you keep in contact with the radios.Nobody would believe that your buddy exists. You're using a level of communication that's beyond the science of the day. But just because it wasn't physically and scientifically possible at the time, doesn't make it impossible.It's not a matter of being so advanced we cannot explain it. It is a matter of definition: gods are defined to be above nature, and in some cases above logic. When you define an object like this, it cannot be understood or followed using natural laws (or in the rare cases, which I mentioned, logic).What about natural evidences that cannot be explained naturally. Like if gravity turned off all the sudden. Or something smaller, like a mountain getting up and jumping into the ocean.We'd be left twiddling our thumbs, unable to explain it. We simply have no method for evaluating the supernatural, if it even exists.