Best Recent Content

• Read the article in its entirety. Post your views on Trump´s foreign policy when he was in office.

  MichaelElpers

  3:11AM
  @Delilah6120
  
  The author was clearly not right wing he voted for Obama twice. Thats not my problem with it though and saying its a credible source doesnt disprove what I said either.
  There are plenty of credible sources that can provide opinion pieces or that can get things wrong.  Im dealing with the specific article and how you believe the arguments presented are fact and not just opinion.
  
  So what do I believe were Trumps successes in foreign policy.
  
  1. No new wars. As far as Im concerned that is huge and is one of the biggest indicators of successful foreign policy
  2. He quickly quashed ISIS and made them mostly irrelevant after they grew under Obama.
  3. He pulled troops out of the middle east and it wasnt a huge blunder like bidens pull from afghanistan.
  4. He pulled us from the Paris climate accords.
  5. He got our allies to increase there defense spending.
  6. Recognized Jerusalem as part of Israel.
  7. High tensions with North Korea died down.
  8. He helped increase security at the border. Another big one for me.
  9. I believe we had a better diplomatic relationship with Russia.
  
  Some things I think he did wrong.
  
  1. Tariffs
  2. He over corrected on Covid.  Too much lockdown.  However liberals would probably argue he didnt lockdown the economy long enough.
  
  Where do you think Biden has succeeded on foreign policy?
  Theres 2 major global conflicts.
  Tensions with China are escalating
  Historic illegal border crossings
  Disaster pull from afghanistan.
  
  You think this is better?
  
  
  

  

• What Evidence do Atheists Have that there is no God?

  Factfinder

  12:48AM
  @MayCaesar
  
  We are arguing against dogma and doctrine. At what point should we question our own sanity for engaging them? 
  
  Well okay boredom is a pretty good reason. LOL

  

• What Evidence do Atheists Have that there is no God?

  Factfinder

  12:29AM
  @OakTownA
  
  If you can provide a single verifiable, documented case where an amputee's limb has grown back, I will stop being an atheist, and donate ALL of my current savings to the church of your choice. 
  
  I made the same request awhile back and Just_sayin responded with this fantasy...
  
  https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/171521/#Comment_171521
  
  He actually believes a moch trial meant to lift the spirits of a gullible people during the dark ages is proof. He also thinks the fact the guys leg has all the scars means it grew back instead of the guy simply never had his leg amputated. He will not back down from asserting this silliness as it would destroy his faith.

  

• What Evidence do Atheists Have that there is no God?

  MayCaesar

  12:37AM

  Jweishuhn said:

  @Factfinder
  
  There is a reason why people claim the creation of the universe is evidence, because the scientific evidence that shows the precision and complexity of what lies within our universe in order for it to survive, leads one to believe that it had an intelligent designer. You speak of that being based off of faith and in many ways you are correct, because at the end of the day, it cannot be proven beyond a shadow of doubt that it was created by a designer. However, the same can and should be said about those who hold to the Big Bang theory. For the simple fact that, that theory is pretty much based on a miracle in itself. There is no empirical evidence that proves that the universe was created from nothing, it is simply a theory that a magical atom appeared out of nowhere, that it exploded and somehow everything managed to fall into the exact places they needed to in order for the universe to survive. The probability of that happening is beyond astronomical. Therefore, is it not fair to conclude that those who hold to the Big Bang theory hold to an assertion of faith as well? 

  As it has been pointed out on numerous occasions, the Big Bang theory does not claim that "the universe was created from nothing". It does not posit any "magical atoms", any "exploding atoms", et cetera.
  
  It is quite boring to hear the same erroneous statements repeated over and over by the same people, while their correction is just one google query or one ChatGPT prompt away. Here, I will even do the latter for you. Here is its reply (the highlights are mine):
  
  
  
  
  

  Certainly! Here’s a concise explanation of the Big Bang theory that you can use to clarify misunderstandings in your discussions:

  ---

  The Big Bang theory is a scientific model describing the early development of the Universe. According to this theory, the Universe began from an extremely hot and dense state about 13.8 billion years ago and has been expanding ever since. This initial state is not described as "nothing"; rather, it was a singularity encompassing all of the mass and energy of the Universe.

  Key points about the Big Bang theory include:

  1. Initial Singularity: The Big Bang started as a singularity, a point where the density and gravity may have been infinite. This singularity marks the limit of our understanding, as the laws of physics as currently known do not apply in such extreme conditions.

  2. Expansion, Not Explosion: The term "Big Bang" might suggest an explosion, but the theory actually describes an expansion. This means space itself has been expanding, and continues to expand, carrying galaxies with it.

  3. Cosmic Background Radiation: The Big Bang theory is supported by observable evidence such as the cosmic microwave background radiation, which is the cooled remnant from the early state of the Universe, now observed as microwave energy permeating the cosmos.

  4. No Claim About Prior Conditions: The Big Bang theory does not provide a mechanism or explanation for what "caused" the singularity or what conditions were like before it. It merely describes the evolution of the Universe from that initial state onward.

  5. Does Not Address Creation: Importantly, the Big Bang theory does not address the creation of the Universe from "nothing." It does not speculate on what preceded the singularity or if "before" the singularity is a meaningful concept, as our understanding of time itself starts with the Big Bang.

  This explanation underscores that the Big Bang theory is focused on describing how the Universe has evolved over time from a hot, dense state and does not make assertions about existential origins or what might have come "before" the Big Bang.

  
  

  
  

  And before someone accuses of me having no arguments and having ChatGPT speak for me... I have said pretty much the same things as it did on numerous occasions - but the resident religious folks pretended that it did not happen. They cannot pretend that ChatGPT does not say it, however, for anyone can verify that first-hand. Anyone can also verify that I have said all of these things before, but looking for my comments on this website is clearly more time-consuming than writing a short ChatGPT prompt.

  

• Do you believe Trump has the strength of character to be trusted with the nuclear codes?

  Factfinder

  12:42AM
  @MayCaesar
  
  People like Trump and Putin, their egos want to SEE their legacies take shape. Cant do that if you start a nuclear war and kill everybody off including yourself. LOL

  

• Do you believe Trump has the strength of character to be trusted with the nuclear codes?

  MayCaesar

  12:30AM
  @Delilah6120
  
  The idea that a rugged enterpreneur who has gone through thousands very tough high stakes negotiations with serious partners and shareholders would just fire off nukes because someone did not agree with him on something - and that the US command would just stand by and watch him do that - sounds utterly unrealistic to me.

  

• Do you believe Trump has the strength of character to be trusted with the nuclear codes?

  MayCaesar

  April 30

  Factfinder said:

  @Delilah6120
  
  If personal character was the only standard for determining who would fire nukes off Biden would have done so by now.

  Oh, but he cannot. There was this amazing joke: 
  
  "Biden is like a web browser: there are 19 tabs open, 17 are frozen, and he has no idea where the music is coming from".
  
  If he wanted to fire off nukes, it would probably take him longer to find and input the nuclear codes than he has left in his presidency.

  

• Does Praying Work?

  MayCaesar

  January 7

  just_sayin said:
  
  So, you already have extraordinary evidence available.  There are at least 24 witnesses who are documented concerning the event.  What more evidence is needed?  Could it be that you are moving the goal posts at this point, because you don't believe the supernatural is possible?  That's certainly the case with @MayCasesar.  He believes science has the answer even when science says it doesn't have the answer and that its not possible.  I admire his faith.  I just don't have enough faith though to be an atheist.  Instead, I see all the facts in this case and the due diligence to ensure that it isn't a fake or made up story, and I see the numerous witnesses and I have to conclude that the event took place.  

  Small correction: @MayCaesar does not hold this belief, as he explained to @just_sayin on numerous occasions. @just_saying is a habitual liar and slanderer, so please do not take his descriptions of other people's views seriously.

  

• What Evidence do Atheists Have that there is no God?

  just_sayin

  April 1
  If you have been reading the debate you are probably wondering why all the atheists are avoiding the topic and are instead attacking people of faith.  It's because they don't have any evidence that there is no God.  When asked to explain how a universe could start from zero space, the atheist just wants you to take it on faith.  When you ask them why the universe is astronomically finely tuned and how do they explain this, especially since there are no laws of nature that require the fundamental forces to be as they are, you get pathetic answers like 'cause it just is'.  When you ask the atheist to provide evidence that abiogenesis works - just make life from non-life, they just stare at you with the 'I got nothin' look.  When you ask the atheist to explain documented instances of miracles, they just start the science of the gaps song.  When you point out that it is actually science which is saying that the miracles are impossible, yet they happened, you get the 'I got nothin' look again.  Instead atheists want us to believe:
  
  1) everything came from nothing
  2) complexity came from chaos
  3) life came from non-life
  4) Consciousness came from inanimate objects
  5) Morals came from matter
  
  That's a lot of faith claims without any evidence at all.  I just don't have enough faith to be an atheist.  

  

• What Evidence do Atheists Have that there is no God?

  MayCaesar

  April 1
  @Factfinder
  
  I think that "atheists" make stuff up all the time as well: this is just how humans think. We like to engage in sweet lies in our thinking and are often quite deliberate about it. The whole idea of communism, for instance, is a product of such lies.
  
  Being "atheist" simply means lacking a particular system of fantasy beliefs. It does not imply lacking any such system in general.