Noahs Ark Debate
Debate Rounds (5)
Some information about myself: I am a Christian (one of the smart ones). I am technically considered a Methodist, and also very young (14).
I have a few goals in this debate:
I wish to warn you that this is really my first religious debate, and I may seem a little inexperienced in this field.
May God bless us all. I guess you can pray to the Giant Flying Speghetti Monster (I deny his existence, though). :)
Now that that is out of the way, I will wait for your argument to be made so that I can indeed "Come at you, bro".
Richard Dawkins asks:
1. Think what the geographical distribution would look like if they had all dispersed form Noah's Ark.
a.Shouldn't there be some type of law of decreasing species diversity as we move away from the epicenter?
("I don't have to tell you that's not what we see")-Dawkins quote
b.Why would all of the marsupials migrate to Australia, but no placental did at all?
c.Which route did they take?
d.Why did not a single member of their straggling caravan pause on the way settling in another haven along the way?
e. Why did the penguins migrate south to the Antarctic, but not one to the equally hospitable Arctic?
Next I will address Noahs age:
1. Noah lived during the Neolithic Era where the average life expectancy was 21 years old. With a max age of around
40 years old.
a. This low life expectancy was due to the high mortality rate from viruses, infection and many other illnesses that
are easily treatable today.
b. A lot of people back then simply died from their teeth.
c. Assuming Noah escaped all of these natural deaths he would hardly be in tip top shape. The concept that Noah did
not break any bones or have a "work related accident" is Highly improbable!
d. The only way that Abraham, Moses and Noah could have lived as long as they did they would have to be under
some kind of divine protection from God. Which greatly affects "Free will" considering it is only measured by the
time you have to use it. (Like killing everyone in the flood. Intervening and ending the lives greatly affects their
fee will since they don't have a life to use it!)
Next I would like to address the issue of the "Great Flood"
1. First of all I would like to mention that the flood myth predates Noah's time by thousands of years.
2. I did some research to find out where all of the water came from and found a very interesting explanation!
a. The Earth is a flat disk surrounded by a spherical atmosphere shielding the earth from "the deep" or outer space.
This shield is called "The Firmament"
b. God opened up a window in the firmament and down poured the flood waters (Which hardly sounds like "rain")
c. Basically the Earth is a stone globe floating in water?
I will now argue the Ark being used to house 2 or 7 of every animal including food and water and Noah's family!
1.The Ark was not even the size of the Titanic. The Titanic is still not large enough to hold every animal let alone their
food and water!
a. The Queen Marry II is more than twice the size of Noah's Ark, and still wouldn't even be big enough!
b. "The Ark as described is a huge boat made of wood, which is not exactly prime shipbuilding material. Considering that the largest known wooden boats are 300 feet long, have to be reinforced with iron straps, and require constant pumping, and that neither pumps nor iron were available to Noah, the Ark wouldn't be very seaworthy"
2 The feeding duties left to Noah were insurmountable due to the special diets of millions of different animal and insect
species. Including the preservation and storage of the many varieties of dietary foods.
a Carnivores like lions and hyenas require a fresh meat diet to sustain their digestive systems. Studies have shown
that feeding them dried meat would cause their highly acidic digestive systems to shut down. They would be better
off eating spoiled meat! http://books.google.com...
b. The Adactylidium mite survives specifically by eating the eggs of the Marthal bug. Noah would have to have that
specific obscure biological knowledge, an optical microscope, and a years supply of preserved eggs!
I will now address the theory that it never rained before the flood!
1. I'm having a hard time finding evidence to the contrary so I am going to have to use common sense for my argument
a. Rain is EXTREMELY important for the survival of all living things!
b. The proof that it has always rained is the fact that Earth is a live able planet.
c. Without rain this planet would be as inhabitable as Mars!
2. Scientists have a very full understanding of where rainbows come from without conceding to the possibility of
a supernatural hypothesis!
I have a few random questions:
1. Were there dinosaurs on this ark? Did the flood cause their extinction?
2.Did Noah ensure the proper care and diet of parasites?
3. Didn't the flood completely trash the ecosystems of each animal? How did they eat after the flood?
4. Were there 2 of every Flora on this ark?
Not holding back, eh? Good. Let's debate!
Response to Richard Darkwins
1. The problem here is that there is an assumption here that God went further into inative deitism after the flood.
a. God would have caused/assisted the distribution. I am certain that if God could summon these animals, he could also multiply their offsprings and distribute them as he wants.
b. God could have put them there. Perhaps, as people expanded, they helped in destributing animals.
c. What if they were teleported?
d. Perhaps God wanted them elsewhere.
e. Because God decided to place them in South.
1. I assume this is true.
a. I assume this is true.
c. You and I both agree that this is not how biology works. However, the Bible claims that people live well into there 900s. This is clearly unnatural, and was presumably caused by God wanting it this way. God gave Samuel emense strngth that also isn't biologically possible. If God can let people live that long and let people be that strong, then why can't a guy be of or beyond his prime for several years?
d. You and I have very different understandings of free will.
Free will to me is the ability to decide what you are going to do instead of that being decided for you.
God's killing of people does not show that the victims are unable to choose there own actions; it shows that the victim is unable of choose what others do to them/what things do to them.
The Great Flood
1. That does not show that the flood didn't happen. It shows that this was a common fear of ancient cultures.
2. Did you now?
a. Some say this.
b. You're right. It doesn't.
c. Some claim this. Some say the Earth is just flat. Some people say Obama is a Lizard-Man. It doesn't matter. This is not stated in the Bible.
1. What if God broke the laws of everything to allow this to be possible.
a. Look at 1.
b. God can make people live to 800. He can make wood boats seaworthy.
a. Could God not just change their diets, or better yet, allow them to live without food?
b. See a.
First Rain Theory
b. Unless God said otherwise.
c. Where does the Bible claim it never rained before? I haven't read it!
2. You can't analyze God with SCIENCE!
Answers to Your Questions
1. Perhaps they were already extinct.
2. Possibly, if God let him. What if God fed them? What if parasites didn't need food for that time?
3. If God created everything, he could rebuild everything!
4. What if they weren't onboard? God could just respawn them.
A Wizard Did It!
My defense is based on you using logic as your offense. Logic does not apply to an omnipotent being. This stands up because you would have to presuppose that the Biblical God exists in order to believe the Flood Story, and if you try to disprove God, you couldn't due to the unreliability of logic in relations to an illogical being.
I Take it you do not believe in Evolution then! Probably didn't learn it in school eh? Maybe we should be debating that topic. Did you know Evolution stopped being just a "theory" about 10 years ago. Its as solid as the evidence for chemistry and Biology.. I bet you will be learning those subjects!
Free will is indeed an illusive concept. Honestly I can recognize that I have free will, but it is most often that you are actually reacting instead of directly controlling your actions. We are tied to natural laws and boundaries that limit our will within a set structure.(Including physical and Mental Health/ Environment)! What you will notice if you look at the geographical placement of each religion is a perfect illustration how your environment actually controls what you think and do (to some extent, of course there is a "Discipline" that allows you to be free of this, which is the part of us that is edging its way further down the evolutionary chain.. very slowly.. away from our animal stupidity)This type of Adaptation is part of Natural selection that dictates a persons beliefs to their geographical locations, not unlike the process of evolution through the distributions of each animal (Human) to adapt and evolve to survive its environment!
Think about it.. The necessity to adapt to whatever country you live in causes a natural progression towards conflict.. but we both know the real answer.. Where does your love and compassion for human beings stop? Your family..Friends..town..state..country..continent..world? You see the pattern? Even though we know the conflict this causes we continue it as if it just a normal part of our lives, not realizing that it is the rotting corpse of the past and we need to let it go.. This Christian Muslim, Atheist, Democrat, Broncos, 49ers.. always looking for a competition or a fight because this life would be boring without it :) We are Humans first and foremost, our only real concern is the survival and health of everyone that can be helped.. that is our responsibility as the "lords of the land" (Obviously some things cannot be remedied) Enough calling yourself "American" or "Christian" the correct word is "Earthling" or "Human"!
From our earliest accounts of history we have always had a duality structure for our moral compass. (Good/ Bad, Light/ Dark, Republican/Democrat) Basically you see God as heads and Sin as Tails.. But if you recognize the patterns in this concept where each opposing idea is actually 1/2 of the "Coin"! The coin is a good representation because if you notice a Coin is a single object with two opposing sides.. You claim that there is only one God.. I tell you GOD IS THE COIN.. ehhmmm *coughs* O.K. now before you run off telling people -some idiot told you God is a coin. I will make this simpler. When I use the word God.. it is not giving credit to anything. It is simply another word for EVERYTHING! You know... Existence (You, Me, All Life, All conscious thought, The Atom and infinitely smaller than an atom, The Universe and Even space itself) Now I know it sounds like I'm making some crap up, I am only giving you a definition of the word God. Not some dude that wants to be my daddy or throw me in an eternal torment/ fiery repeatable agony spa! Anyways I apologize for the rant.. Feel free to let it bounce off of your Jesus shell! I would have kept debating the Noah's Ark thing, but clearly your hearts not in it! Feel free to write back though.. I love to rant and argue.. although I'm not sure if anyone actually reads it :) Peace
Just so were clear... your argument is God's magic made it possible?
My argument is that if you believe that Noah's ark is true, you could reasonably assume that the Bible is true. If the Bible is true like one on my side would logically presuppose, then the Ark story is possible.
It was funny though
I bet it was! I have a pet-theory that Christians sound like lunatics to most people.
Gave me some perspective of what they are teaching people these days!
This was not an accurate presentation of all that is being taught. As I see it, we are taught one of three mentalities:
Do not even try to question anything as to not doubt our faith. The smallest group, they follow the "Don't ask, but we tell" mentality, with mostly Conservatives/Fundamentalist followers. Mormons are often accused of falling here; the Westborro Baptist Church seem to lay here; Fundamental Amish/Mennonites also fall here.
Question, but tread lightly.
This is the largest group. They ask questions and expect deeper answers in contrast to the more archaic/cult-like mentality of the first category. This spans many denominations and ideologies. They wish to learn about the Bible as opposed to fitting into a model of social acceptance. They are more open to other ideas, and may become atheistic/agnostic, though this change is rare. Most mainstream churches fall here. I fall here.
This group is the second largest, also spanning several ideologies. These people tend to, but not always, believe less in the literal interpretations, having more of a symbolic outlook. Agnostics and deists occasionally fit here, with the ideas expressed in the Bible being more moral-guidelines to them as opposed to actual stories of Gods and demons.
I Take it you do not believe in Evolution then! Probably didn't learn it in school eh?
Um... dude? They HAVE to teach that as it is the best model we have for explaining our existence. I've learned it since 3rd Grade...
My views on evolution is that Natural Selection and Survival of the Fittest does exist in one form or another. I believe it IS possible for a human-like Homo-Sapien to evolve from the simple chemicals found on Earth (though implausible to me). I do not believe, though, that enough time passed for these events to occur, and that the odds are too far against that evolution. Many atheist scientist doubt the validity of evolution, however science has yet to/cannot come up with a better/more plausible explanation.
I bet you will be learning those subjects!
I am considered "excellent", apparently being within the top 2% percent of American children (test score-wise. It is worth noting, though, that the test is from Kentucky, a place notorious for low test scores.) I wonder if they're really just trying to save my self-esteem!
I have learned this, like I said, since 3rd Grade, and have already finished high-school health, middle-school science, almost 2 years of math, and in soon will finish high-school biology.
We are tied to natural laws and boundaries that limit our will within a set structure.(Including physical and Mental Health/ Environment)!
Ah, yes. Philosophy. I love philosophy; I consider myself border-line nihilistic with Christian principles.
I know that sounds strange, but let me explain.
Life (you, me, humanity, even God) is inherently meaningless unless a higher being (God) made us for some purpose and says so. Here, a conundrum arises: How do we know if a God exists and says otherwise? I could claim that God has said "Humanity mean this", but a Muslim could claim Allah said "Humanity means this", and then it would be their word vs our word, which goes nowhere. It is, in this way, that things are meaningless because we can't find ground for objective meaning. So then it comes to "What principles do I believe in?". The answer: the ones in the Bible. Should others live like me? I think so, but it is their choice and I have no right to infringe on that.
Anyways, I believe that humans are characterized by their perceptions and experiences. In this way, environmental factors molds people down to the basic level, but those same people can consciously choose what to do after they're created, and can choose to go beyond their original purpose, which was to survive.
Though environment has some effect and most everything we do is a means of survival, we can override this by starving ourselves to death, or to otherwise mold our actions as to provide a result that isn't specifically to survive.
I do not believe humans can be altruistic; anything we do for others is motivated by religion, survival, or pursuit of happiness. However, we can perform complex action to help others that both aid our pursuit of happiness and help others. Animals cannot do this; they might starve themselves as a result of their actions, but they can't actively set out to help others at the exclusion of their own survival.
I think the mere ability of humans to do thing for theirs and others' happiness, rather than survival, is proof that humans aren't strictly natural but are something higher than an animal, whether they arrived at that stage through evolution or were placed here by some higher being.
It is because of these beliefs that I proudly identify myself as a human. When I see a commercial over the starving children in Africa, I say "Too bad", not because I don't care, but because I can't do anything about.
I have a better plan to fix the problem than to send $100 overseas as if the money will fix the problem.
"What's this plan?" you might ask.
My friends, my enemies, my classmates, my schoolmates, my playmates, the antisocial kids down the hall, the extroverts, the introverts, the Christians, the atheists, the Bhuddists, the Hindus, the Muslims, and I will spearhead a new generation of people who will fix the problems money hasn't been able to.
Leaders today are selfish, bickering over meaningless things. I sense we are migrating into that "We are one" mentality, and in 400 years, I believe that "3rd world country" will be mentioned in the same light as the phonograph.
There won't be foreign nations, but there would be one planet called "Earth", made up of the huge neighboring communities once called "countries". We'll have cultural differences, sure. One place might be socialist, while another is capitalist. One might be 90% Hindu, while another might be 60% Christians. But we would wave and smile at each other, not as strangers, but as a family.
Lol. Did you really think I wouldn't understand the coin metaphor?
I don't agree with the metaphor, however.
I see the world as a set of 7 billion dice (representing people) in a cup (representing Earth) where all the dice are rolled. They often collide with each other, and affect what the outcomes of each other, but they still land on a number. The dice then separate themselves based on whether they're even or odd (good or bad, light or dark, etc.).
I foresee a future where every one of the dice see themselves as a collective number (They see themselves as #5 altogether instead of #1,#1,#3 in a cup).
Anyways I apologize for the rant..
Don't! It was fun to read and to respond to! You weren't (overtly) disrespectful, and your points were worth giving.
I thank you from my heart for starting this!
Anyways, I hope I understood your ideas, and I hope my points made sense. What do you think? You can respond. This is meaningful.
John Lennon's wrote a song called "God", if you haven't heard it, its fantastic. John Lennon was atheist, and that was what he had to say about everything from politics to religion.
However, I would change its lyrics a little. It would be:
I don't need to believe in Bible,
I don't need to believe in God,
I don't need to believe in Jesus,
I don't need to believe in Science,
I don't need to believe in you,
I need to believe in me.
That is good to know.. I would like to know how long your school has been teaching evolution. Mine didn't and I hear a lot of people saying that we need to "teach the controversy" It made me very happy to hear that you were not being denied a proper education because people have their undies in a bunch and I don't really understand why.. except I find it hard to believe you can have your cake and eat it too when it comes to believing in evolution while maintaining Christian status.. Richard Dawkins put it "You can't have it both ways". The Christians that do not believe in evolution do so because they think that Genesis is our origin, they know the two concepts do not co exist. It is the Christians that believe in Evolution that are deluded. Evolution tears out the very foundation of the Christian house of cards. It leaves zero room for the Adam and Eve/original sin myth and pummels the Noah's Ark exodus myth! Without original sin Jesus sacrificed himself in vein and we end up with:
"single celled amoeba evolved into simpletons that started singing Jingle Bells for Jesus.. Not to Knock the teachings Jesus brings but the Bibles a good read like Steven Kings Needful things"- Sage Francis
I will say that you surprised me with your rant.. reminds me of a younger me *tear* anyways, that was not meant to be demeaning in any way.. you have got a good hold on things from what I can tell, except for the whole Christianity thing, but I don't blame you... you grew up in a culture that embraces the Christian church.. just be glad you didn't grow up in Saudi Arabia (especially if you were female)
"What principles do I believe in?". The answer: the ones in the Bible. Should others live like me? I think so
You made an interesting case about the communication breakdown among different cultures. I would like to use that example to illustrate the complexity of this system. When you say that the bible is the answer and a Muslim says the Koran is the answer you arrive at a conflict of misunderstanding. This conflict has been nurtured by the extreme cultural differences of the two "tribes"! To the outside observer (non believer) we see a web of patterns between every religion that has existed each one borrowing and modifying different fables and myths. Today we have a few stragglers including some rather odd variations of judeo christianity (latter day saints, Mormons) the different denominations of Christianity alone shows the web of myths that people choose whether or not to believe. So when you say "Should others live like me" you are simply stating that your piece of the web should satisfy everyone in their search for truth.. the problem is they are going to say the exact same thing about their "web"! No I'm not saying that we are like spider men :) So I think we both agree that absolute truth is trumped by relative truth when people are involved, thanks to the myth web misunderstanding!
"but those same people can consciously choose what to do after they're created, and can choose to go beyond their original purpose, which was to survive."
when you say created you mean born.. I don't know this for sure but you didn't make a whole lot of cognitive choices. Those choices were afforded to you by the nurturing of your mother and community, you are at a point where your choices are appearing to have consequences and you adapt your choices accordingly. Even your choice of religion was a process not unlike natural selection. It was a cultural and environmental necessity that you may have adapted accordingly (Not saying I really know why your Christian, just making an example) but I do not argue that we do not have a "choice" I'm saying that it might not really be "you" that made that choice!
"Though environment has some effect and most everything we do is a means of survival, we can override this by starving ourselves to death, or to otherwise mold our actions as to provide a result that isn't specifically to survive."
I am by no means an expert on this subject, I invite you to listen to Richard Dawkins to explain this better, Everything can be explained by natural selection, even if only by a "misfiring" of that specific gene, not unlike a mutation. Something like suicide can be explained as a "step" in the wrong direction. Now using the word "wrong" I feel is relative, anyways moving on.. in many cases suicide is caused an illness that (obviously) bypasses the primal instinct to survive! There are many examples that each deserve a proper discussion , but due to the limited space I will summarize, Natural selection and evolution have been known to produce some anomalies, but as far as I have researched these things are usually explained as the equivalent of a tumor... a mutation caused by an interruption of a natural process! Keep in mind I have pieced this together myself and do not claim to be any kind of prophet or genius.. but I do have some insight and am very observant of the human condition! So take my word for it.. just kidding!
"I do not believe humans can be altruistic; anything we do for others is motivated by religion, survival, or pursuit of happiness. However, we can perform complex action to help others that both aid our pursuit of happiness and help others."
I will expand on my previous argument about "misfiring" of natural selection! This is not to demean it in any way. I do say that positive results are positive results, gift horse/mouth! The religious and secular morality coexist in this process though innately linked to survival. At one point in time almost everyone you saw was someone who could reciprocate those good deeds, now that we are in a time when good deeds are less likely to be reciprocated by strangers we still have a "desire" to help that person because of our genetic coding that lay deep in your blood lineage! My argument stands that even though we are an evolved animal species we have been known to have some devastating and remarkable "side effects" (Suicides, pseudo-altruism)
About your "Plan":
Idealology (is that a word?) is my specialty, although often times I find myself wondering; Does my idealology have a place in reality? Then I think about the billions of people that have their own idealology. They don't exactly line up.. that's a lot of resistance! I don't think that anyone has the power to evangelize a universal system that will not be opposed (with serious bloodshed)I gave you a little taste of my idealology with my rant about not calling myself Christian, American, democrat,etc.. I believe that the essence of conflict comes from the illusion of individuality (ego). The God that I "Evangelize" is connected to everything, it is universal, no need to complicate it. My core objection to any religion is that it is "exclusive" Every side is "THE SIDE"! I propose that it doesn't matter.. it is not only futile but insane! The only truth involves everyone, and until I hear people progress towards unity, I will have no part in any "side"!
I did really enjoy your metaphor. (sincerely) but I do not see how your theory contradicts mine. Both analogies rely on a black and white system to even be communicated (we need a better language) Your analogy may have used dice instead of a coin but the essence is the same. You can see the coin as two opposing sides of the dice. so technically a dice would just be 3 coins. Your conclusion also paralleled my own. So when I said "God is the coin" I was saying that #5 is "God"! The difference is that where you see a group of individual people I just see "God". So I am simply defining what the word "God" means to me (everything) I hope you were not talking about #5 being Christianity.. that would be absurd! :)
You came back stronger from your opening arguments which inspired my rant.. looking forward to further discussion!
I would like to know how long your school has been teaching evolution.
Since the late '90s at least! I live in the South (in the Bible-Belt, no less!), so I assume that the rest of the nation has the class to.
1st Grade: Everyone comes from parents
2nd Grade: Draw a cell/basic cell structure
3rd Grade: Cell Reproduction/cell structure
4th Grade: Plant ananomy/plant reproduction
5th Grade: Basic Genetics/Survival of the fittest/Natural Selection
6th Grade: Complex Genetics/Mutation/Plant anatomy
7th Grade: Complex cell structure/Basic anatomy/Geneology
8th Grade: Human reproduction/Complex anatomy
That is interesting! Where do you live? I just assumed everyone learned it!
"You can't have it both ways"
I don't think I want it both ways. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough.
Evolution is a valid explanation for how we became what we are today; I can't disprove it. However, I do not think that it is the way it happened. (I believe that Genesis is indeed an accurate account of human history).
I do believe that evolution exists in at least one form: adaptation. Why do people seem to live in areas where their traits are useful? Adaptation! Did adaptation cause humans to exist? I think not.
when you say created you mean born..
created=evolved or designed.
I do not argue that we do not have a "choice" I'm saying that it might not really be "you" that made that choice!
What I mean is: we are self-aware, and can stop others from making the choice.
Babies aren't aware of consequences or proactivity. They aren't really partial to freedom or captivity. As long as their needs are met, they're happy.
Chimps are the same way. They only care about their survival, and then they don't care about the cause of their existence, or their grandchilds happiness. They want survival.
We are different. We are far more inquisitive than anything else. As soon as we can care for ourselves, survival isn't the only end. Others' happiness is. Staying moral is.
I choose to believe. I don't have to anymore. I had to when I was young; I knew no different!
My father is a Democrat. I think that we are screwed no matter what party is leading!
I'm sure you get it, even if you disagree.
I am by no means an expert on this subject, I invite you to listen to Richard Dawkins to explain this better
I sadly have not listened to any of his lectures. I will look on Youtube. He sounds intellectual.
Something like suicide can be explained as a "step" in the wrong direction.
It can be, but does it have to be? Many humans are indifferent to death. All animals (except humans) avoid death. Humans don't have to. It would be a HUGE misfire for an entire species to be able to choose to be indifferent to death. I know that not everyone doess, but they could choose to be, and that seems to be a gene's worst nightmare.
in many cases suicide is caused an illness
I agree. However, if you don't care if you die, is that suicide? I don't know the numbers, but I know a lot of humans don't care if they die. Most people care more about how they die. This seems to be a disadvantage in humans. It seems to make it much harder to accomplish their natural goal: survival. Maybe this is an anomaly. I dont know. I, like you, am no expert.
At one point in time almost everyone you saw was someone who could reciprocate those good deeds, now that we are in a time when good deeds are less likely to be reciprocated by strangers we still have a "desire" to help that person because of our genetic coding that lay deep in your blood lineage!
Quite possible. I don't know.
Question: If we knowingly only help someone who won't be able to help us, does that satisfy that gene? I don't know.
I think my plan will work because more and more people are having the same conversation we are. They are becoming unified into one humanity, made up of different former clans (Brahma would be proud!).
They want to be one, they just lack the torch to light the path. They want to be one world, with petty differences forgotten. Without that torch, they stumble and fall. I can gaurantee you, someone of my generation will be that torch. We would light he path, and show people the way.
We will show people that individuality is a virtue, a virtue not to be foresaken. And we would invite these individuals to come live in a house called Earth, not defined by personal beliefs, but defined by unity, peace, and care.
If we existed in this world, it would be quaint to know that you're an athiest; It wouldn't be important. What would be important is who you are. You're a human, and so your beliefs would be okay.
There wouldn't be religion, there would be beliefs. Those beliefs would be celebrated and discussed, but they would not be centers of attack. They would not cause the violent desputes we see in Saudi Arabia.
Everyone is striving for utopia, we will just light a torch.
I do not see how your theory contradicts mine.
Coin flips are independent events. Dice rolled in a cup affect the others' outcome. I guess it was a little bit pointless to create another analogy.
I'm happy this didn't turn into a flame war. See you.
Finalfan forfeited this round.
Here we are again. It is this time.
I ask that the voters do not hold my opponent's forfeit against him, seeing as we got marryied. Congradulations!
How I Think Voting Should Go
Spelling/Grammar: I don't know... TIE?
Arguments: OK. Look back to what this debate was about: Noah's Ark. Did I out debate my opponent? I'm going to say "No, I didn't."
Source: Give me won pownt pweez... In all seriousness, my opponent referenced experts, which I think counts.
Thank you. Everyone. Especially my opponent. I enjoyed myself.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.