The Instigator
Akhenaten
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
MagicAintReal
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Stephen Hawking was fool and knew nothing about how the universe works

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
MagicAintReal
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/17/2018 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,020 times Debate No: 110863
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (84)
Votes (1)

 

Akhenaten

Pro

I propose that anybody who doesn't know the cause of their own disease must be a fool and therefore would be incapable of working out how the universe works.
MagicAintReal

Con

*I request that voters use opt-in voting standards when voting on this debate.
*I accept.
*Definitions were not supplied.
*Therefore, I will supply them.

Definitions

Stephen Hawking - an English theoretical physicist, cosmologist, author, and Director of Research at the Centre for Theoretical Cosmology within the University of Cambridge.
http://www.ctc.cam.ac.uk...

fool - a person who acts unwisely.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

knew - was aware of through observation, inquiry, or information.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

nothing - not anything.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

how - in what way or manner; by what means.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

universe - all existing matter and space considered as a whole; the cosmos.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

works - operates in a proper or particular way.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...
(Verb #2)
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...


Let's light this candle!
Debate Round No. 1
Akhenaten

Pro

1. Stephen hawking was unaware of the nature and cause of his own disease. The human nervous system is vulnerable to attack from certain dangerous chemicals. These chemicals would include the halogens - chlorine, fluorine and bromine as well as the heavy metals lead, arsenic and mercury. Stephen Hawking's age of 76 puts him right in the middle of a government program to spray children's playgrounds with DDT. Stephen Hawking would have been 5 years old at the time of the most intensive spraying. DDT contain halogen chemicals which eat away the myelin layer that protects the nervous system. The government and pharmaceutical companies have deceived the public on this issue and have created a non- existent virus, called 'poliomyelitis,' as a means of protecting themselves from blame and litigation. The pharmaceutical industry has issued a so called 'vaccine' to eradicate the so called 'polio virus'. But, this is all just an elaborate deception. There are no viruses of any description. I eat a Paleo diet and never get any colds, flu, headaches, stomach pains, chest pains or other disease symptoms. This is because humans have been eating the wrong foods for over 10,000 years since the beginning of the agricultural revolution. Disease is purely a human creation and doesn't occur in undisturbed and pristine nature. Humans have disrupted nature by growing crops and spraying these crops with pesticides. Human arrogance has led many people to think that a chemical that kills insects can't harm humans. My opponent is most probably one of these individuals.

2. Thus, I have clearly demonstrated that Stephen Hawking was ignorant of the nature of human disease and in particular he was ignorant of his own condition. Thus, any person who can't understand how nature works would be incapable of working out how the universe works. This is clearly demonstrated by Stephen Hawking's concept of time. Note - Time is a measurement of spin and rotation. You can't turn time into a linear vector. But, this is exactly what both Einstein and Hawking have attempted to do. Note - Time does not change with acceleration. But, according to both Einstein and Hawking, it does. Time is purely a measurement. Note - Time may appear to change with acceleration. But, this is purely an illusion because atheric pressure is acting on the measuring devise making it contract with compression. Thus, the clock mechanisms may slow down due to atheric pressure and not because 'time itself' has changed. This just logic and common sense.

3. Thirdly, I need to address human nature and the university system where all these mistakes are made. The science world is full of mistakes and misconceptions. This is because the science world has to make a living and maintain its status. In order to make a living from science, the professors have to complicate and make things difficult to understand. This is how they maintain their high income and prestige. Thus, the universe must appear as complex as possible for them to achieve high status and prestige. Therefore, a simple universe that contains only one sub-atomic particle in 3 states wouldn't be considered a viable option purely because there is no status or prestige to be gained. The same goes for the medical science system. A simple medical system that involves only one disease for all problems wouldn't be considered because there's no money or prestige in a one disease theory. Note - All human diseases are just variations in vitamin deficiency. Thus, leaky gut syndrome allows bacteria to enter the gut causing most disease. All other disease would come from toxic chemicals in the environment. Thus, all disease can be easily prevented at virtually zero cost to the community.
MagicAintReal

Con

Thanks for that Pro.
Pro has issues with salt-making elements.
Pro's case is that DDT made Hawking unaware of his condition.
Pro attempts to link this with being unaware of how the universe works.

*Things Hawking Knew About How The Universe Works*

1. A star will curve and distort the spacetime near it, more and more, the more massive and more compact the star is.
http://www.hawking.org.uk...

2. The amplitude is low for surfaces which are not nearly conformal to the round three-sphere and essentially zero for surfaces with negative curvature.
https://arxiv.org...

3. The evolution of the universe is determined by its quantum state.
https://arxiv.org...

4. The wave function of the universe obeys the constraints of general relativity.
https://arxiv.org...

5. A quantum state specifies amplitudes for different geometry and field configurations on a spacelike surface.
https://arxiv.org...

These effectively negate that Stephen Hawking knew nothing about how the universe works, because they are all published work by Hawking himself and they explain precisely how the universe works.


*Responding to Pro*

Pro asserts:
"Stephen hawking was unaware of the nature and cause of his own disease. Thus, any person who can't understand how nature works would be incapable of working out how the universe works."

My response:
Aside from the facts that a) Stephen Hawking was well aware of his condition (ALS) and b) being unaware of one's condition does not de facto make one unaware of nature, why does one need to understand medical diagnoses in order to understand how the universe works?

Whether or not Hawking knew anything about ALS is irrelevant to whether or not he knew anything about how the universe works.


Pro says:
"Time is a measurement of spin and rotation."

My response:
Well, that's one way to measure time, sure.
But spacetime is a continuum along which the universe expands at a fixed rate.


Pro continues:
"Time is purely a measurement."

My response:
Except that it's on a continuum with space, and the space of the universe is ever expanding.


*Conclusion*

The resolution has Pro affirming that Hawking knew nothing about the universe, yet Hawking's knowledge on the matter is easily accessible and demonstrates that both a) Hawking knew something about how the universe works and b) he was not a fool.

The resolution has been negated.
Debate Round No. 2
Akhenaten

Pro

My opponent has failed to respond to a number of issues that I have raised in round 2. His answers are very short and concise but fail to appropriately deal with the complexities of the issues at hand.

1. Con assumes that DDT made Stephen Hawking unaware of his condition. Sorry, Con, DDT is a pesticide and has no intellectual influence. Being a leading scientist, one should be up to date in the latest scientific trends and information. But, apparently, Stephen Hawking had a few big blind spots. He didn't appear to know anything about vitamins, halogens and how the human body works. He may have understood the conventional medical theory that germs are the cause of disease but unfortunately the germ theory of disease causation is faulty. I have explain in round 2 why this is so, but my opponent didn't respond. I think my opponent hopes to win the debate by ignoring important issues. Note - The medical system is a microcosm of the science world as a whole. It is built on many false assumptions which are based on further and older assumptions. All of which are incorrect and false. The problem is that there is no money to be made from a vitamin deficiency theory of disease. Thus, the medical system has opted for the more profitable germ theory of disease which makes both doctors and pharmaceutical companies rich and powerful.

This same principle applies to the world of theoretical physics. A simple universe which is made of only one particle in 3 states would easily satisfy all the laws of physics. Yet, this concept has been ignored in favour of a more complex universe. This is done because a more complex universe is more profitable to university professors and they get higher recognition and status as a result.

There is also the issue of government control of the masses. In order for governments to control the masses, they need to confuse the masses with complex equations which have the effect of subduing people into submission. The universe of Stephen Hawking is a very confusing and complex mess of irrational values and forces which really doesn't make and sense. But, alas, the universe is not this complex and confusing. This is just a deception which is designed to confuse people into submission. Submission and compliance is the object of the exercise.

Further, there is the matter of political correctness. Both Stephen Hawking and Albert Einstein were protected by an invisible shield of political correctness. This is because Hawking had a disability and Einstein was Jewish, which mean't that neither person could be criticised or questioned without the discrimination label being placed on the doubter. Thus, they could say or do as they pleased and nobody could ever criticise or question their sanity or accuracy.

Still waiting for my opponent to respond to the following statements.

1. Stephen Hawking's disease caused by DDT and not a virus.

2. Why was the world's smartest person unable to know about the cause of his own condition?

3. Did Stephen Hawking have a deal with the pharmaceutical companies to keep him quiet?

4. Paleo diet avoids all diseases.

5. Leaky gut syndrome explains how bacteria enter blood stream. Thus, germ theory is false.

https://www.express.co.uk...

http://www.debate.org...
MagicAintReal

Con

Thanks for that, Pro.
Ugh...It was pretty annoying to read that last round.
Pro needs to get over all of this diet solves everything hysteria.
It's extremely irrelevant to this debate.

*Review*

Stephen Hawking knew a lot about how the universe works, quite antithetical to the resolution.
I provided 5 examples in round 2 detailing what Stephen Hawking knew about how the universe works.
They have been dropped by Pro.


*Responding to Pro*

Pro reasons:
"Being a leading scientist, one should be up to date in the latest scientific information. Stephen Hawking didn't appear to know *anything* about vitamins, halogens and how the human body works."

My response:
Funny.
I recall him living way longer than he should have, and when asked *why* he thought he had this particular syndrome he said:
"I believe motor neurone disease is a syndrome that can have different causes. Maybe my variety is due to bad absorption of vitamins."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

So he knew something about vitamins and their relationship with his disease.

"Professor Hawking supplements his diet with daily mineral and vitamin tablets, and zinc, cod liver oil capsules, folic acid, vitamin B complex, vitamin B-12, vitamin C and vitamin E are said to have been particularly helpful."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


Pro concedes:
"He may have understood the conventional medical theory that germs are the cause of disease."

My response:
Pro concedes that Hawking knew something about nature and medicine.

Pro continues:
"but unfortunately the germ theory of disease causation is faulty."

My response:
Ugh.
Explain why an infestation of Staphylococcus and Streptococcus in one's body isn't pathogenic.
Germ Theory is a fact and irrelevant to a debate about whether or not Stephen Hawking is a fool or knew anything about how the universe works.


Pro continues:
"The medical system is a microcosm of the science world as a whole. It is built on many false assumptions which are based on further and older assumptions."

My response:
Medical science is not built on false assumptions, especially evidence-based medicine, and even if it were, it does not slippery slope into a problem with the other modern sciences or modern science as a whole.
The fact that modern science has a rigorous peer review process and incredibly high experimental standards discredits the idea that the theories are built on something faulty.

If you wanted a debate about modern medicine, why then have a debate about Stephen Hawking's knowledge of how the universe works?
You sure you're not on the Lameo diet?
It's a diet that gives you tons of energy to annoy people with irrelevant nonsense.
It also makes you really lame.
Hence the name of the diet.


Pro flies of the rails:
"Both Stephen Hawking and Albert Einstein were protected by an invisible shield of political correctness. This is because Hawking had a disability and Einstein was Jewish."

My response:
I almost spilled my matzoh ball soup on my copy of Briefer History of Time reading that.
The chutzpah of this guy!
Both men had to face a ton of hardship, from Jewish oppression to the stigmatizing of the disabled.
Pro's just way off here.


*Pro's Numbered Responses*

Pro whines:
"Still waiting for my opponent to respond to the following statements."

My response:
Still waiting for my opponent to have relevant-to-the-resolution responses.

Pro lists:
"1. Stephen Hawking's disease caused by DDT and not a virus."

My response:
This wouldn't indicate that Stephen Hawking is a fool or didn't know *anything* about how the universe works.
Pro's point about DDT causing Hawking's disease is as irrelevant as a meat eating competition at a vegan convention.

Pro adds:
"2. Why was the world's smartest person unable to know about the cause of his own condition?"

My response:
This is a concession that Hawking was the world's smartest person, effectively negating the resolution that he was a fool.
Also, Hawking has commented on the cause of his disease, see above.

Pro throws in:
"3. Did Stephen Hawking have a deal with the pharmaceutical companies to keep him quiet?"

My response:
Did the price of Biryani from Kurdistan increase in Australia's state of Victoria?
Come on Pro...this is way off topic and the answer is likely "no."

Pro piles on:
"4. Paleo diet avoids all diseases."

My response:
This is as irrelevant to this debate as showing a silent movie about colors to the honorees at a ceremony honoring the blind.
Also, we've cleared up that you're on the Lameo diet.
So lame.

Pro ends with:
"5. Leaky gut syndrome explains how bacteria enter blood stream. Thus, germ theory is false."

My response:
Attacking germ theory in a debate about one's understanding of how the universe works is like attacking plate tectonics in a debate about whether or not a dietitian knows anything about how the human body works.
Also, this seems to admit that bacteria entering the blood stream is a fact, regardless of how it got there, which confirms germ theory, the idea that microorganisms and viruses invade your body and act as pathogens.
Pro concedes this.


*Conclusion*

Stephen Hawking was not a fool and knew very much about how the universe works.
Pro has not touched my examples, so they stand.
Also, Pro is veering into complete irrelevancy and is growing more annoying by the post.
Voters take note.
Debate Round No. 3
Akhenaten

Pro

My opponent wants to shut me down and not talk about issues because in his opinion they are of no importance. I have to point out and old saying - "you are what you eat". Thus, if you eat sh*t, then you will turn into a sh*t. Note - I am not implying that my opponent eats sh*t though. lol
I hope my opponent doesn't find this post too annoying and not to his liking. I wouldn't want to upset him too much. lol

Now, my well informed opponent sees no connection between health and diet. Hmmmm??
Didn't Hippocrates say that all disease begins in the gut. Hmmmmm???
Oh well.... what would the father of medicine know about disease anyway! lol

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Hell, those facts are really annoying aren't they! My opponent must be fuming by now! lol

Back to the universe.

My opponent seems to think I have ignored all his references. Well, I bet he didn't read any of his own references though. lol

Sorry opponent!
All I left was one meagre refutation of all his meagre theories with one meagre picture of a meagre galaxy on the meagre edge of the meagre universe which doesn't fit Stephen Hawking's meagre theory of how the meagre universe works. lol

Here it is again. Open your eyes this time!

https://www.express.co.uk...

Sorry, I hope that you don't find my meagre refutation too annoying. lol

Staphylococcus infections.

This bacteria is just a common bacteria found everywhere and is not dangerous to humans. What is dangerous to humans is a bad diet which allows bacteria to enter the blood stream where it doesn't belong. Bacteria belong in the gut and digestive system. They cause no harm there. Thus, if you avoid eating dairy, sugar and grain, bacteria will never enter your blood stream and you will never get sick. Both you and Stephen Hawking don't know this. This is what separates a fool from a wise person. Thus, Stephen Hawking was a fool.

Quote - "Medical science is not built on false assumptions"

Really? That means that you haven't read several books that I have read.

http://aetherforce.com...

http://neue-medizin.com...

https://ahealedplanet.net...

My opponent doesn't see any connection between nature and physics. Thus, we can only conclude that he must be totally blind and ignorant.
MagicAintReal

Con

Thanks for that response Pro.
The opposite of thanks for the persistent irrelevant nonsense; stop it.
Still no response to Hawking's knowledge of how the universe works?
Noted.

*Responding to Pro*

Pro gripes:
"My opponent wants to shut me down and not talk about issues because in his opinion they are of no importance."

My response:
Oh, they're also very stupid...that's another reason we should "shut down" the irrelevant issues.


Pro recalls:
"I have to point out and old saying - "you are what you eat"."

My response:
Then, I have to point out it's wrong because by that logic, after we eat spinach our cells have chloroplasts and we can photosynthesize light, water, and carbon dioxide into sugar.
You are what you eat, right?
You eat a tuna fish sandwich and suddenly you can breathe through your gills under water.


Pro strawmans:
"Now, my well informed opponent sees no connection between health and diet."

My response:
No, I see no connection between health/diet and knowledge of the universe.
You still haven't gotten to it.


Pro believes:
"My opponent seems to think I have ignored all his references."

My response:
Yes, you've also ignored the quotes that I extracted from those sources, and since you've not addressed them, they also stand.


Pro wagers:
"Well, I bet he didn't read any of his own references though."

My response:
So, in order for me to have extracted the quotations, I would have had to read the references.
Is there a reason you've not attempted to refute any of those quotations?
I know...they're especially damning to your case.


Pro points out:
"All I left was one meager refutation."

My response:
The link that you made no effort to clarify, specify, or use to indicate relevant examples simply says they've found a black hole that appears to contrast with current understanding of how black holes are formed.

The problem is, Con's source doesn't cite any science-based information, in fact, Con's source doesn't cite ANYTHING, so we're left buying Express's word on the matter.
I would say that the black hole they claim is too large to have formed in the time since the big bang could have been a trinary star system (3 stars) that became one triple-massive star and then went nova and created such a gigantic black hole.

This also does not negate that Hawking knew a lot about how the universe works.


Pro mentions Staphylococcus:
"This bacteria is just a common bacteria found everywhere and is not dangerous to humans."

My response:
"About 18,700 people die in this country (USA) each year from drug-resistant staph infections, according to a federal study."
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov...

MRSA is dangerous to humans, deadly to about 18,000 humans a year, and even though we're getting a hold on those resistant bacteria, they persist in hospitals everywhere.


*Conclusion*

Con needs to step it up, he's not refuting anything of substance, and is wasting everyone's time with irrelevant nonsense.
Stephen Hawking was not a fool and knows a lot about how the universe works.
Just ask Con on the matter.
Debate Round No. 4
Akhenaten

Pro

1. Gravity is pushing action, not a pulling force.

Reference - http://www.abc.net.au...

This contradicts Stephen Hawking's basic ideas and undermines his theories. Thus, his concept that light can't escape a black hole due to gravity is false.

2. Quote from Stephen Hawking " an object called spacetime" lol

This idiot doesn't understand the English language, let alone the complexities of the universe. Note - An abstract concept can't be called or referred to as "an object."

3. Pulling gravity is horse and buggy era concept. Note - The horse pushes the buggy from the strap across the horse's chest. Yet, brain dead people like Hawking still keep referring to this pulling gravity stuff. Note - There is no rope attached to the moon from the Earth. Thus, if there is no mechanism of action, then, there is no action. Note - The universe is purely mechanical in nature and magic has no part to play.

4. Quote from Stephen Hawking - " different directions called spacetime"

Time is not a linear vector. Time is a measurement of spin and rotation. You can't tack on another dimension to a 3 dimensional world and call it spacetime. This is a violation of both logic and physics.

5. Quote from Stephen Hawking - "light curves around the sun due to gravity"

Sorry, Stephen, light only curves when travelling through a medium of different density. The sun's atmosphere provides this different density and has nothing to do with gravity. Nincompoop! Oh boy! Basic science Stephen. Were you sleeping in science class again, Stephen? Teacher told you not to fall asleep Stephen! lol

6. Thus, I have clearly proven that Stephen Hawking's theories are a total nonsense and based on previously held nonsense ideas which have been long since been shown to be lacking in both logic and any evidence. Thus, pure thinking without experimentation is flaunt with danger and subject to wild speculations without any solid foundations. Thus, armchair physicists like Einstein and Hawking are just two out of date dinosaurs which the science world has elevated to star status without any consideration of their lack of logic or basic commonsense.

7. Quote from Con -
"Then, I have to point out it's wrong because by that logic, after we eat spinach our cells have chloroplasts and we can photosynthesize light, water, and carbon dioxide into sugar.
You are what you eat, right?
You eat a tuna fish sandwich and suddenly you can breathe through your gills under water."

Reply - Your basic logic is flawed. When you eat spinach, your body breaks it down into usable molecules. But, when you eat grain, your body's intestine track will be damaged by the grain's fibre which will cause your gut to leak. This will allow bacteria to enter your blood stream and you will get sick. Thus, grain is an unsuitable food for humans to eat. Thus, the tuna sandwich will make you sick if you eat too many of them. Note - The more grain you eat, the faster you will get sick. Grain tends to stick in the gut like a big rock and doesn't move like other foods. That's because your body doesn't know what to do with it. Its unnatural.

Until you learn this basic lesson you too will remain a fool like Stephen Hawking.

Quote from Con -
"No, I see no connection between health/diet and knowledge of the universe."

Reply - A person who doesn't keep healthy will be unable to understand the universe. The universe is everywhere, of which, health and diet takes a large contributing part. Note - It was from studying the human diet that I came upon the idea of a simple universe which is made from just one particle in 3 states. Note - The medical system is over complex and similar to the world of physics. Note - There are not thousands of different diseases. There is only one human disease which is called vitamin deficiency. Note - There are not hundreds of different sub-atomic particles. The universe is made from only one particle in 3 states which is positive, negative and neutral. This can be further simplified into left spin, right spin and no spin. Note - a no spin particle is a hole in space that spinning particles rotate around. We call these atoms. Note - Stephen Hawking often talks about "atoms of space". What he is referring to here is the 'aether.'

http://www.debate.org...
MagicAintReal

Con

Thanks for that Pro.
Pro has not responded to *any* of the 5 cited things Hawking knew.
Not one.
Instead Pro creates their own Stephen Hawking strawman, and idiocy ensues.

*Review*

I have proven that Stephen Hawking knew more than *nothing* abut how the universe works and Pro has dropped this point, which negates the resolution.


*Responding to Pro*

Pro asserts:
"Gravity is pushing action, not a pulling force."

My response:
I think the distinction between pulling and pushing with respects to gravity is arbitrary.
As long as you understand that the center of gravity of one mass is influencing the center of gravity of another mass and vice versa *because* of the curving of space, you can call it pushing or pulling; it doesn't matter.

This also wouldn't undermine the things Hawking knew about how the universe works mentioned in my 2nd round and left untouched by Pro.


Pro quotes:
"Quote from Stephen Hawking 'an object called spacetime.' This idiot doesn't understand the complexities of the universe. An abstract concept can't be called or referred to as "an object."

My response:
Spacetime is a material consisting of the fluctuations of sub nuclear particles and their forces, which, thanks to annihilation, never remain.
This material of never remaining, fluctuating particles is that "abstract concept" you can't seem to understand is itself a material.


Pro points out:
"There is no rope attached to the moon from the Earth."

My response:
However, the non-remaining, fluctuating sub nuclear particles and their forces (space) between the Earth and the Moon becomes distorted by the mass of the Earth and the mass of the Moon creating a barycenter in that very space about which the two celestial bodies orbit.

The space between the Earth and the Moon connect the two gravitationally, no rope necessary.


Pro reaches:
"The universe is everywhere, of which, health and diet takes a large contributing part."

My response:
Nope.
Health and diet have only been shown on Earth, not on ANY other planet, star, moon or any other celestial entity known to exist in the universe.


*Conclusion*

Well thanks Pro, we're now all dumber for having read your irrelevance, we've learned that you drop arguments like they're covered in baby oil, and it's clear your obsession with diet/disease/glutophobia is so pervasive, it made its way into a debate about how the universe works and whether or not a recently deceased physicist knew anything about it.

Lameo diets will do that to you.
So lame.
Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
84 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by MagicAintReal 3 years ago
MagicAintReal
Ugh.
Go away.
Posted by Akhenaten 3 years ago
Akhenaten
Are all Americans as stupid and ignorant as the ones on this website? lol
To kim Jong Il if you are listening - Press that button now!!!!!!!
Posted by MagicAintReal 3 years ago
MagicAintReal
One could have read the debate and still remained incompetent...
The converse is also true.
Posted by Akhenaten 3 years ago
Akhenaten
Clearly whiteflame is incompetent and didn't read the debate.
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Wylted // Mod action: NOT Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Con showed peer reviewed studies that Stephen Hawking conducted proving he knew at least something about the universe. Pro asserts that Stephen hawking had some blind spots, namely in terms of nutrition, but this iin no way proves that Hawking knew absolutely nothing. Pro fails to prove his case or disprove that HawkingS research doesn?t prove con?s point.

[*Reason non-removal*] Same reason as given before. Unless the reporter contacts me directly, further reports will be ignored.
************************************************************************
Posted by John_C_1812 3 years ago
John_C_1812
( I only have facts and have no religion) I would agree openly had you not been both writing and speaking with the use of self-value.

So let"s go back to you sources. Do you, or do you not understand that consistent use is a nation method used to rate a website? A number of hits is clear evidence a web-site might experience a vote set as one of the meanings of reliability. Once understood it might be easier to move on to the other meaning involving credential as well that might also be associated to the cite.
Posted by John_C_1812 3 years ago
John_C_1812
( I only have facts and have no religion) I would agree openly had you not been both writing and speaking with the use of self-value.

So let"s go back to you sources. Do you, or do you not understand that consistent use is a nation method used to rate a website? A number of hits is clear evidence a web-site might experience a vote set as one of the meanings of reliability. Once understood it might be easier to move on to the other meaning involving credential as well that might also be associated to the cite.

Fact! I am a liar. My alibi.
It is simply due to my humility in understanding I cannot remember all truth; all truth has not been told to me yet. It is fact you appear to have grasped all truth as it spills from your lips like a child running with a cup of water across a grass yard. Your glass however is not all truth.
Posted by Akhenaten 3 years ago
Akhenaten
All religion is criminal activity. I only have facts and have no religion.
Posted by John_C_1812 3 years ago
John_C_1812
Two things.

Religion is not dictated so you are as religious as me.

Knowing and study are not the same thing so the observation would be if a person understands little of science, they themselves may wish to look deeper into the study of many types of science. Not less. Your memory of retained information may be great, by your ability to observer general happenings and your own needs work. Though you grammar is structured to a changing norm, it still translated acts of criminal conduct and arrogance.

What I can state as fact, my religion is unknown to you. So it may be best for you not to dictate one upon me. As hard as it is to believe it makes you look as shallow as a mirage.
Posted by Akhenaten 3 years ago
Akhenaten
It is obvious from reading your comments that you are a dyslexic moron. Please stay away from all science discussions. You are just a religious nuisance. You don't know anything about science. Just keep studying your silly Bible. lol
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
AkhenatenMagicAintRealTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con showed peer reviewed studies that Stephen Hawking conducted proving he knew at least something about the universe. Pro asserts that Stephen hawking had some blind spots, namely in terms of nutrition, but this iin no way proves that Hawking knew absolutely nothing. Pro fails to prove his case or disprove that HawkingS research doesn?t prove con?s point.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.