Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.
Debra AI Prediction
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
I couldn't have said it better myself
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 19%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 89%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.24  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: nbsp         
  Relevant (Beta): 93%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 79%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.88  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: debating platform    last comment   response   old method of personal attacking  
  Relevant (Beta): 93%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 92%  
  Substantial: 27%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 85%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 4.68  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 77%  
  Substantial: 71%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.82  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: medical condition    evidence   countless videos   none  
  Relevant (Beta): 89%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 53%  
  Substantial: 51%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.72  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: way    dog   nbsp    
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 76%  
  Substantial: 36%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.42  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: bunch of lies    evidence   nbsp    
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
You do realize that Evolution in its entirety isn't a lie. Rather the socialistic and macro-evolution aspects of it are theories waiting to be dis/proven. The one thing we can take from it as fact is that evolution takes place within a species (Micro Evolution as long as it is through the eyes of intelligent design). if you don't believe this I can supply sources at which you can look.
  Considerate: 83%  
  Substantial: 89%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.48  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: evolution aspects    Micro Evolution   Evolution   thing  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 80%  
  Substantial: 32%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 71%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.6  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: evidence    gt   facepalm   lt  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
billboard hasn't really been a part of this who was your last post aimed at
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 35%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.96  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: BenShapirosCousin billboard    part   last post    
  Relevant (Beta): 79%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 52%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 4.3  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: whole purpose of this website    sight   debating website   evidence  
  Relevant (Beta): 53%  
  Learn More About Debra
You say ......
My reply .....I didn’t “personally attack “ you I merely pointed out that I’m hardly to blame for your ignorance regarding what is accepted as fact in most the civilized world as in Evolution
You say ......Secondly, I'm not going to go watch a video and read some documents,
My reply .....I know you’re not which is why you remain in a continuous state of ignorance on mostly everything if this is your attitude
You say .....if I were wanting to do that I could've done that myself.
My reply ....You could ,at least you now know why you remain in ignorance
You say ......This is a debating platform, for debaters, not for people who send a million documents that were written and done by other people besides themselves.
My reply ......You’re not debating you’re trolling , no one has sent you a “million documents “ you asked for information you refuse to even read or look at it because you’re a troll
You say .....So please, if you will, list some evidence. thank you very much.
My reply .....I’ve done so in twenty easy bullet points you’re failure to comprehend this is your fault not mine
  Considerate: 49%  
  Substantial: 91%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 88%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.7  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: easy bullet points    civilized world   continuous state of ignorance   reply  
  Relevant (Beta): 94%  
  Learn More About Debra
They are all examples of animals evolving into new species. It specifically talks about this in the articles e.g. just as one of many examples: " This new family, characterized by an unexpected combination of primitive and derived characters, is bridging the missing link between suborders of Archidermaptera and Eodermaptera. "
If you are going to demand evidence then not even look at it, you aren't engaging honestly with the debate and are just here to mindlessly spout ideology.
Even the specific examples you request are well known - Archaeopteryx is one of the most famous transitional fossils and represents a step between dinosaurs and avian birds, having the wings and flight feathers of the latter but the teeth and tail of the former. For sea creatures to land you can see this in fossils like Panderichthys, Tiktaalik and Acanthostega. Your monkey to man is a bit nonsensical and vague seeing as there wasn't a single step between monkeys and men but a great many, but it's still easily providable if you make a sensible request (e.g. divergence of Homo from the other apes) seeing as Homo Sapiens is relatively new and came from other similar homos like Homo Erectus which came from other great apes like Nakalipithecus which came from the more monkey-like primates like Nacholapithecus. There's a whole long chain of fossils showing the gradual evolution from monkey to man.
  Considerate: 63%  
  Substantial: 82%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.6  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 54%  
  Learn More About Debra
None of them discuss micro-evolution, please don't lie just to cover up the fact you didn't read the articles.
For the title of the study you quote, if you'd actually read it you'd see the two possible intepretations of the data backed up by science present it as a transitional fossil or is still a transitional fossil but one with a slightly different relationship to the other similar fossils. Under no interpretation backed by scientific analysis and evidence is it anything but a transitional fossil.
If you feel there is an interpretation where it is not a transitional fossil and you feel you can back this up with evidence. Until you do so, your own personal interpretation based off of ideology rather than evidence is irrelevant.
  Considerate: 90%  
  Substantial: 94%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 13.14  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: transitional fossil    scientific analysis   title of the study   possible intepretations of the data  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
1) Why would I bother to provide you with more evidence when you refuse to even look at what's been provided?
2) Those were peer reviewed scientific studies back up by existing scientific literature as shown in their sources. It's the gold standard of evidence and if you are refusing to look at it, the issue is with you.
3) I note you still haven't provided even an iota of evidence to support your claims.
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 92%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.84  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: gold standard of evidence    scientific studies   medical condition   scientific literature  
  Relevant (Beta): 90%  
  Learn More About Debra
You say .....Excuse me,
My reply ....You’re excused
You say ......but as I have said before, this a debating website
My reply ......It is , maybe you should quit trolling and attempt debating?
You say .....Not a sight for you to state your *beliefs* and then send me to some other website to debate.
My reply .... I know it’s not a “sight “ it is a site though . I didnt state my “beliefs”, I stated Evolution is accepted as fact by rational beings. I also didn’t send you off to debate on some other website , I sent you off so you might receive that which you lack as in a basic education on Evolution
You say ....Why are you even here if you're not going to debate?
My reply ....I’m here to debate , I do so frequently, I’m not here to amuse trolls like you
You say .....Isn't that the whole purpose of this website?
My reply .....It is , but you’re a troll I realized this when I spotted that you called Evolution “Evilpolution “ ....that’s trolling
You say .....I mean, it just makes sense.
My reply ....That’s something you totally lack ....sense
You say ..... (P.S. I would also really enjoy some evidence for your case to be listed, thanks so much, *God* bless.)
My reply .....( P.S. I’ve listed loads get someone to read it out to you , thanks so much , you sent me blessings , great ,you prayed for me I will think for you )
  Considerate: 40%  
  Substantial: 78%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 84%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 4.34  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: websiteMy reply    basic education   reply   sense.My reply  
  Relevant (Beta): 36%  
  Learn More About Debra
I'm more on your side more than I am Dee's and Ampersand's. But they are giving you sources that are excepted by "popular" science. They give these references because it is a debating site and the references voices are more reliable then their own. So, take the time to read. If you don't then you are walking in the darkness, and you need light in the darkness so you don't "dash your foot against a stone."
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 70%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.7  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 52%  
  Learn More About Debra
http://www.firstdallas.org/icampus/blog/the-myth-of-macroevolution/
The evidence you give isn't transitional evidence it is merely micro-evolution. Different species with similar features doesn't prove evolution it is in fact evidence for intelligent design. I'm not saying evolution shouldn't be taught in schools I'm saying it shouldn't be the only thing taught in schools they should include other theories as well. And remember just because something is widely excepted as fact doesn't mean it is fact. "Slaves aren't human and deserve no rights" that was once widely excepted as fact and in some parts of the world it still is.
  Considerate: 77%  
  Substantial: 69%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.56  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 65%  
  Learn More About Debra
And I read every example you gave me.
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 31%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.36  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: example    nbsp      
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
Intelligent Design is many things, but one thing it isn't, is a valid scientific theory... The fact that ID uncritically combines new arguments from biological and mathematical research with a who’s who of old creationist canards points to larger methodological flaws. As Judge William Overton pointed out in his landmark pro-evolution ruling in McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, it is “contrived dualism” to reason that “all scientific evidence which fails to support the theory of evolution is necessarily scientific evidence in support of” a preferred alternative notion, in this case intelligent design.
This, however, is precisely how ID proponents argue their cause. They claim that a loose combination of intelligent design arguments can stand toe-to-toe with evolution as a competing theory, even though it doesn’t meet technical definitions and standards set by science.
In order to be valid, a scientific theory must unite a broad range of observations, inferences, and facts under a detailed explanation which makes predictions about the outcomes of future experiments and observations. All theories have gaps which invite further investigation and testing, and through this process some theories are discarded, while others are strengthened. But when a well-supported theory falls by the wayside, it is almost always because an alternative has been proposed which accounts for more facts and makes better predictions (for example, the replacement of Newtonian Physics with Einstein’s Theory of Relativity).
In contrast, intelligent design is a less comprehensive alternative to evolutionary theory. While evolution relies upon detailed, well-defined processes such as mutation and natural selection, ID offers no descriptions of the design process or the designer. In fact, proponents do not even agree among themselves as to which biological phenomena were designed and which were not. Ultimately, this “theory” amounts to nothing more than pointing to holes in evolution and responding with a one-word, unceasingly repeated mantra: “design.” But unless ID advocates fill in the details, there is no way to scientifically test intelligent design or make predictions from it for future research. In short, it is not valid science.
  Considerate: 91%  
  Substantial: 93%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.08  
  Sources: 2  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: valid scientific theory    Intelligent Design   theory of evolution   scientific evidence  
  Relevant (Beta): 58%  
  Learn More About Debra
https://intelligentdesign.org/whatisid/
The theory of intelligent design is very specific and very comprehensive and goes right along with the scientific method. It has been discarded by the popular science committee only because it isn't considered to be politically correct or socially acceptable.
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 62%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.8  
  Sources: 1  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: theory of intelligent design    scientific method   popular science committee   nbsp  
  Relevant (Beta): 38%  
  Learn More About Debra
That site you're citing is not a valid scientific source and neither is answersingenesis.org and other apologetics parachurch organization....
If you're not willing to work with corroborated facts, there's no point in arguing...
  Considerate: 79%  
  Substantial: 61%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 78%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.32  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: valid scientific source    parachurch organization   site   apologetics  
  Relevant (Beta): 57%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 75%  
  Substantial: 69%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 81%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.62  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: valid scientific source    parachurch organization   MRI scanner   young earth creationist  
  Relevant (Beta): 81%  
  Learn More About Debra
You discard sites because they are religious when in fact religious sites should be trusted because they look into to science to try and explain the beauty of Gods work. I could just as easily by basis in my work by saying any non-religious sites have invalid science but I don't because unlike you I don't shade my eyes from the light of truth and find it wherever I can.
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 74%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.72  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: PlaffelvohfenYou discard sites    religious sites   beauty of Gods work   basis  
  Relevant (Beta): 84%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 52%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.02  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: little water    lots of time   little time   lot of water  
  Relevant (Beta): 80%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 83%  
  Substantial: 61%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.02  
  Sources: 2  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: religious sites    beauty of Gods work   non-religious sites   kevin  
  Relevant (Beta): 22%  
  Learn More About Debra
"That site you're citing is not a valid scientific source and neither is answersingenesis.org and other apologetics parachurch organization....
If you're not willing to work with corroborated facts, there's no point in arguing... "
Kevin Burk posted a link to a webpage full of random claims. There was no actual evidence to support the ideology Kevin was pushing, unlike the evidence in support of evolution that has been provided.
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 85%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 82%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.1  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 87%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 91%  
  Substantial: 7%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.28  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 88%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 38%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 86%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.58  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: science research    Answers   Genesis   scientists  
  Relevant (Beta): 31%  
  Learn More About Debra
In 2019, denying evolution is like denying the earth is spherical... In this age of information, ignorance is a choice, own it!
  Considerate: 86%  
  Substantial: 60%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.6  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: age of information    science research   facts   Answers  
  Relevant (Beta): 70%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 40%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 88%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.8  
  Sources: 1  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: Kenneth Miller    Im   truth   biologist  
  Relevant (Beta): 6%  
  Learn More About Debra
K. Miller??? He supports evolution... In the video you linked, he just rips "creationist science" apart piece by piece... At the 27:00 mark, he answers the question of this thread, he summarizes in 3 minutes why ID / Creationism has absolutely no place in science classes, because : It's NOT science!!
  Considerate: 72%  
  Substantial: 51%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 85%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.96  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 89%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 56%  
  Substantial: 54%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 88%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.76  
  Sources: 1  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: intelligent design    Kenneth Miller   Im   mind  
  Relevant (Beta): 52%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 59%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.16  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: point    special treatment   first post   theories  
  Relevant (Beta): 65%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 89%  
  Substantial: 25%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.4  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: evolution    evolution lacks evidence      
  Relevant (Beta): 87%  
  Learn More About Debra
All theories should be taught to an equal extent so we can give the younger generations the freedom to chose which one they believe to be the most accurate.
  Considerate: 90%  
  Substantial: 80%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.22  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: younger generations    equal extent   intelligent design   point  
  Relevant (Beta): 85%  
  Learn More About Debra
Your claim has been proven false. Your own evidence you just posted shows it is false! That's not even mentioning the scientific studies posted earlier in this debate showing evolution is real and evidence supports it.
Intelligent design isn't a scientific theory, it's a pseudoscience with no evidence to back it up. We shouldn't teach children garbage and lies.
  Considerate: 63%  
  Substantial: 67%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.88  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: intelligent design    scientific studies   point   first post  
  Relevant (Beta): 60%  
  Learn More About Debra
You should watch it... Multiple times if needed...
  Considerate: 79%  
  Substantial: 66%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.2  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: point    Intelligent Design   first post   catastrophic repercussions  
  Relevant (Beta): 29%  
  Learn More About Debra
And I don't like gravity, what am I to do?
You know, Evolution, or Science for that matter, doesn't make it impossible for god to exist, but it does make it possible to exist without god... Just sayin...
  Considerate: 89%  
  Substantial: 59%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.86  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: intelligent design    point   evolution   gravity  
  Relevant (Beta): 84%  
  Learn More About Debra
You say ......Answers in Genesis is apologetics and science research. They have many scientists working for them to try prove Evolution wrong
My reply ......Answers in Genesis is a a really pitiful site as grown men and women waste their days trying to deny reality by appealing to a book of nonsense written by bronzeage goatherds .
You say ......Why would anyone spend their entire life trying to disprove what is accepted as fact?
My reply .......Even if Evolution was proven as false it still doesn’t prove there’s a god does it?
  Considerate: 56%  
  Substantial: 67%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 85%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.72  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: Evolution wrongMy reply    entire life   pitiful site   bronzeage goatherds  
  Relevant (Beta): 77%  
  Learn More About Debra
Thank you for asking him to at least read the sources
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 26%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 79%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.04  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: sources    nbsp      
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
You say ......The point he had which is been the point I've been trying to make if you go back to my first post is that all theories should be taught and not one theory should be singled out for special treatment.
My reply .....I D is not a “theory” it’s mere speculation based on a deeply flawed contradictory book of mainly nonsense , I D is a faith based claim and like all faith based claims is based on spiritual conviction and absolutely nothing else
  Considerate: 64%  
  Substantial: 85%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.76  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: special treatment.My reply    first post   point   mere speculation  
  Relevant (Beta): 90%  
  Learn More About Debra
I'm not sure what you mean in your comment to me. I never claimed to have a right to do anything. All I said was that there's no justifiable reason to not teach evolution in schools.
  Considerate: 77%  
  Substantial: 48%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.54  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: justifiable reason    evolution   schools   comment  
  Relevant (Beta): 95%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 59%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.5  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: single reputable scientific body    evolution   fact   debate  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 27%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 86%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.74  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: fact    nbsp      
  Relevant (Beta): 86%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 76%  
  Substantial: 41%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.04  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: website    facts   nbsp    
  Relevant (Beta): 60%  
  Learn More About Debra
1) You say that Evolution has been proven as "fact" then why is still The *Theory* of Evolution.
2) Secondly, the public school system is indoctrinating students and forcing Evolution down their throats.
3) This is gonna take a while for you to refute so I won't add to much more, go ahead, do. your. worst.
  Considerate: 47%  
  Substantial: 71%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.86  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 94%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 54%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 84%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.1  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: amount of comments    Thanks   clarification   nbsp  
  Relevant (Beta): 64%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 11%  
  Substantial: 80%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.66  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: THEORY    society of children   Evolution   fact  
  Relevant (Beta): 91%  
  Learn More About Debra
https://twitter.com/Zombieguy19871
Taxation is always theft
http://www.atheistrepublic.com/
  Considerate: 85%  
  Substantial: 45%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 86%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.5  
  Sources: 1  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: fact    Creationism   nbsp   BenShapirosCousin  
  Relevant (Beta): 84%  
  Learn More About Debra
1) Evolution remains a *THEORY* because it has NOT been proven, therefore it should not be taught in schools as FACT.
2) The public school system is shoving information down our society of children's throats, this is indoctrination, not education. When they are telling them what to believe not how to form their own system of knowing what to believe.
3) Like I said to @Dee, I will not press any further for I would like you to have a chance at *actually* stating some facts now that you cannot cry over me not providing information. so there you go, give it a whirl.
  Considerate: 74%  
  Substantial: 75%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.14  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: public school system    own system   nbsp   schools  
  Relevant (Beta): 74%  
  Learn More About Debra