The debate "Evolution" was started by
an anonymous person on
March 26, 2015, 5:50 pm.
34 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 16 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
eric1943 posted 1 argument, PsychDave posted 7 arguments, Getmurked posted 4 arguments, Electrogoose posted 1 argument, I_Voyager posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
eric1943 posted 2 arguments, debunkmyths posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
Bodaciouslady16, Mike861, danielle, PsychDave, Getmurked, sickboyblonde, Cormi98, I_Voyager, Hjkp98, Devin, Fromage, stormshy, BRG1102478, Untamed, transfanboy, jesusorgy, sdiop and 17 visitors agree.
eric1943, Electrogoose, pecker, debunkmyths, magda32 and 11 visitors disagree.
Could you back that up by dealing with at least some of the mountain of supporting evidence?
Evolution is a myth. Quick way to end this. It had no empirical evidence what so ever! A faith based religion.
It is all perception, and perception often exposes expectation. I used to be good friends with a few people who were naturally bad at language use. Because of this, they could be very vague in their language use; this gave others a belief that these people were stupid. I learned by talking to them to be interpretive though, to read true meaning deeper in the vagueness of a something given its context. And I learned it's a necessary art after a while, because the smarter you become, studying philosophy, truth, science, computer science, etc... the more vague everyone's language use becomes, so the more valuable an accurate interpretation skill becomes. But something tells me that just like language use, it's a skill which still some people cannot develop.
That is true.
it seems its a matter of perception
you simply saw it as a word, with a agree or disagree. i saw it more along the lines as just a word. when i read an argument, i expect a statement or question, directly in line with thier conclusionary opinon, which i infer from thier post. not given that, and just given a word, i dont see it as just a agree or disagree. but its all perception my friend.
Every time I stand, I use my legs to oppose gravity so, while I accept that gravity is real, I disagree with its hold on me. I will now jump to demonstrate my independence, even if only briefly, from its tyrannical hold.
That is how I interpreted it as well.
I thought the argument was whether or not you agree with evolution...
Fair enough. It is not an in depth debate topic. In this case the topic, and the nature of the voting system, let's us decide whether we agree or disagree with evolution. If it progresses from there into specific parts of evolution, we can take that as it comes.
but the point of the "make new argument" option is to post an argument, not a singlw word. how can i infer what he means by evolution. i come onto these threads based off the argument of the person who made it
Because the buttons are actually named agree and disagree. Those voting no have literally voted that they disagree with evolution.
i could say "pizza" and would you automatically assume i was saying it was disgusting?
how did anyone say that? the topic only said "evolution" witg no clear argument.
I am also curious how half of the votes could say that evolution is false, but not one person offers any evidence to support this.
Someone please share there enlightenment with me on how you have disproved a theory accepted by the entire scientific community. I would love to hear this please 5 people speak up!
The bias on here becomes painfully obvious when half of the people on here don't believe in evolution. There are these things called books... they're used for readin'