Prev: «   |   Next: »
  • nick miner

    Evolution is a proven fact so no argument there.
    The egg came millions of years before the chicken i.e. dinosaurs.
    Euthanasia is the obvious morally right thing to allow.
    Free will is BS.

    • LariLee

      Actually, Nick, the question about evolution vs creationalism makes it into an either/or. Either man was created in God’s image or went to the process of evolution. Mankind’s evolution is not proven. There is the infamous “missing link” that would clench evolution totally. And except for man supposedly being from apes, not that many people have a problem with evolution.

      The chicken and the egg is mostly tongue in cheek.

      I’d love to hear your justification for euthanasia. Hitler had a great one: it would make a stronger Germany if all the mentally, emotionally and physically handicapped people murdered. It saved resources for those who could give more back to their country. I mean, who would decide who gets euthanized? A person who is suffering from depression after getting stood up at the alter? An elderly man who is not ambulatory, but can’t live alone. If he goes into a nursing home, he’ll be unable to allow his heirs to inherit his home. Shouldn’t he die if he wants to, even if there is little physically wrong, so his family can get more money? Would the family maybe start pressuring him? I’m not sure touting euthanasia as moral is quite right.

      And if Free Will is BS, then I don’t have to apologize for anything I said because I was forced to do it with no choice..

      • 4realsies

        “Mankind’s evolution is not proven.” Is too, we’ve found hundreds of missing links. We have the dna too. Ask yourself, “why do people laugh at creationists”? then ask google.

        “euthanasia” You’re going to die some day. When you get to the point you are too frail to walk, talk or even form coherant thoughts, with nothing to look forward too but being tied down in a bed staring at the ceiling, with a machine keeping you alive so you can keep eating through a tube and crapping yourself at the cost of dozens of thousands of dollars a year for your family to pay: you’re going to wish you had the option to bow out gracefully, with dignity on your own terms. When people are talking about euthanasia, thats the cold reality theyre speaking of. Not angsty teens, not genocidal race supremacists; just honest, humble people who know what life has in store for them. People dont like to talk about it and I cant blame them. Its ugly, youre going to die someday and thats the end: make the most of it.

  • Gibasnish

    I agree with you LariLee, tho society seems to think that if something is a miracle from God it is therefor unexplainable, which would be illogical for the creator of the universe, everything has a logical explanation, weather its rejected and ignored by whatever scientific community or not, like the cure for cancer scientifically proven to work from the cannabis sativa’s hemp oil THC content or Chi Gong healing which is the cure for every decease used by most of China, yet you don’t see it being used in the west due to denial influenced through media and/or for non-profit reasons.

    Anyways when you think about it from a logical point of view you can see, religion’s ignorance in America given that although some people do believe in God most of them have the intention of winning heaven through donating to the Christian Church so the Pope can buy his cars, one of the biggest corrupt businesses in America and the most un-christian display of ignorance and disregard for the actual teachings of God which is to THINK for yourself, hence why Jesus spoke in parables. Steven Hawkings is a brilliant man, but he says God doesn’t exist because gravity exists therefor creation can happen independently from divine intervention, yet he ignores the recent discovery that gravity is a law within another law, the force we call gravity is simply a byproduct of nature’s propensity to maximize disorder and we constantly tend to correct ourselves in science every few years, which is good. So are we all supposed to believe what he says is a fact just because hes a scientist that pops in the media? You can then overcome the mainstream media idea of science vs religion and separate religion from the existence of God, because it seems more logical to me that if God does exist he would work within his own laws to preserve the universal balance, through the science he created, so you can say evolution was a product of God’s creation. Think of it as having a bunch of lego pieces and shaking the box of legos until your lego starwars ship is built and doing this for trillions of years, that will just vaporize the pieces.

    Atleast this is my point of view, I believe in God but I don’t agree with the ignorance that there is in today’s Church, their not evolving spiritually nor mentally as human beings. In reality both the scientific community and the “religious” community are lacking some wisdom.

    • 4realsies

      “Think of {evolution} as having a bunch of lego pieces and shaking the box of legos until your lego starwars ship is built and doing this for trillions of years, that will just vaporize the pieces.”

      Could it be that no one takes your arguments seriously because you dont even have a coherent idea of what youre trying to argue against? Evolution isn’t trying to build a spaceship, or a man, or anything in particular.

      Do living things pass on their traits to their children? Yes.
      Do mutations happen? Yes.
      Are these mutations sometimes beneficial? Yes.

      Thats evolution: populations of things that are already alive change over time.

      • Gibasnish

        Your statement made no sense. Clearly I was not referring to evolution in that sentence that you modified, I was referring to creation.

        • 4realsies

          Nope, you’re talking about space ships, implying complexity too overwhelming to just spring into existence. Life as it is today didnt just spring into existence, do a ctrl f for abiogenesis and/or google it. Its all chemistry.

          • Gibasnish

            Surely you can understand such a basic concept, creation applies to the entire universe, everything that was, is and will be, not talking about creationism or abiogenesis. You seem to be on a different page, you keep bringing up evolution and surely you are not just responding to my post to troll. Lets see if this can make you understand, the universe as you see it is a chaotic environment with endless cosmic events, however that very same chaos is part of a delicate balance that causes enough harmony to allow life to spawn from natural chemicals when the right conditions are met and allows that life to survive, we have Jupiter that protects us from large meteors for example, but just the conditions and natural chemicals don’t spark creation, it wont make a single cell organism no matter how millions of years pass, you can try to recreate the same conditions and study it and it will never happen, hence shaking the box of legos.

  • 4realsies

    Let me see if I follow you, you say you’re not talking about abiogenesis, then you say you’re talking about whether “conditions and natural chemicals” spark creation? that is what abiogenesis is.

    an old favorite, The Origin of Life – Abiogenesis
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg

    yeah, jupiter is pretty sweet, if we didnt have it we might not be here. jupiter is only evidence of jupiter though.

    • Gibasnish

      Yes, however I was referring to the entire universe.

      • 4realsies

        Righto, stephen hawking only said that the universe doesnt need a creator. Are you going to look at how he came to that conclusion or just dismiss it out of hand?

        • Gibasnish

          He already explained himself, however it was an illogical statement, at least the way he presented it did not put into consideration certain laws such as the origin of gravity like I said above. You already know I explained this, what are you doing?

          • Mercury

            @Gibasnish: It doesn’t matter if you are right no matter how much logic you put into it, 4realises has been trolling this topic before most of us got here and he wont give up whether he knows it or not and most likely he will turn everything he disagrees with into an aggravated argument based on a text book and videos he looks up on youtube. Oh, also if you do mention this to him, he will try to make some funny remark to attempt to show that hes not aggravating or act as if hes speaking the deep facts out of human theories, he wants to be right like most people, because being wrong would mean tearing a sun into their world of illusions away from the mainstream mentality, so he nitpicks from posts for things to defend his point of view against, which isn’t really a crime until you troll; this is the difference between intelligence and wisdom.

  • 4realsies

    “yet he ignores the recent discovery that gravity is a law within another law, the force we call gravity is simply a byproduct of nature’s propensity to maximize disorder”

    this one? you ramble so much its really hard to follow. At least tell me which other law you are talking about here, maybe even why you think this is at odds with hawkins assertion that the existence of gravity doesnt require a creator? not giving me alot to go on here guy…

    Mercury> tear a sun away :) reality is far more interesting that these bronze age day dreams.

    • Gibasnish

      @Mercury: I understand were your coming from but what you just said is even more aggravating.

      @4realises: “Gravity is a consequence of the venerable laws of thermodynamics, which describe the behavior of heat and gases.” Here is an example, bubbles are usually round even if its not a perfect circle and Saturn’s rings go in a circular-ish shape around of the planet, not sure if Im being clear enough its alot to absorb, I find that metaphysics(scientific branch of philosophy) helps understand aswell.

      • 4realsies

        I coulda sworn you had a link posted before I left for the weekend, it was a fancy looking pdf sort of thing, but I didnt have a change to read it: any chance you can throw it my way again?

  • Mack

    When will you clowns learn the difference between then and than; their, there and they’re? What turd bowl did you get your education from??

    • LariLee

      Quite possibly the same one where you learned your manners, Mack.

  • P Smith

    Whoever “wrote” this list has a grade 5 education. The only way in which one can say these “debates can’t be won” is if one of those debating sticks his fingers in his ears and says “LA LA LA I CAN’T HEAR YOU!”

    Evolution is proven.

    Euthanasia is NEVER forced on unwilling people, it’s strictly voluntary.

    When innocent people can be brought back from the dead (e.g. Cameron Todd Willingham), THEN the “death penalty” will have merit. Until then, it’s sociopaths taking revenge.

    The egg is a single celled organism, around since the first single celled creatures evolved more than three billion years ago. Cell division was how life reproduced then, and it’s how eggs turn into chickens, lizards and babies today. It’s still the same process.

    There is no “god” for the same reason that _you_ are considered innocent until proven guilty: all claims are false until proven true. Until any of the thousands of claimed “gods” is demonstrated to exist, they don’t exist.

    And so one. Only the uneducated, the wilfully ignorant and the religiously brainwashed say otherwise.

  • Wierdbeard65

    The Chicken and the Egg one is a no brainer, I’m afraid.

    The Egg came first. Simple.

    Why?

    Well, if you think about it, the only thing a chicken can hatch from, is a chicken egg.

    BUT

    The first chicken egg was laid by something that was very nearly, but not quire, a chicken. The genetic mutation of this “nearly chicken’s egg” turned it into a chicken.

    So, the egg MUST have been there first.

  • Jim McBride

    and what makes someone look really intelligent is going on and on in an internet debate over arguments that can’t be won when everyone knows you are only going to convince yourself. Arguments that can’t be won are classified as such because there is no clear cut winning side. YOU may be convinced you are correct but those on the the other side of the argument are just as sure of the opposite answer.

    There is no right answer and some arguments have been being carried on for as long as there has been a language to fight over them with

    • 4realsies

      nonsense, children believe in faerie tales, discarding them is an important part of becoming an adult. boisterous headlines arnt facts, theyre just bait to ensnare the bored, gullible sods who were failed by public education.

  • ohlord

    @ state policy based questions like abortion:

    most civilized countries have answered those questions, and the vast majority of those states have answered all those questions the same way, with some mild deviation.

    It seems like some of the so called “fundamental ethical/moral arguments” were just United States-centric and have ceased to be huge issues or never were, for large parts of the world.

  • Xavierserranoa

    I agree with all Of them but the one about the chicken or egg. It’s not so hard to brake aPart just keep in mind that we are talking about what came forts the chicken or the chickens egg( meaning a chicken layed it not an animal evolving into a chicken. When it come tO evolution an animal most have laid it’s egg with a chicken fully evolved in it( probably a chicken like bird)that egg is not a chicken’s egg so wat came first was the chicken that later laid chicken eggs. Now if you’re religious god created animals in pairs so they could mate and lay eggs or give birth to live animals so then again what came first was the chicken without chicken there is no egg

  • Jewpower

    Anyone arguing on a forum specifically for arguments that cannot be won does not need access to the internet… or to food.

  • Jim

    this is hilarious – this thread was started in 2008 and two and a half years later there are people who are still trying to convince others over the ****ing internet.

    make some popcorn and get a coke or a beer and keep watching.

    nobody can be argued or debated into your way of thinking on any of these subject in real life so what could ever make any one think they could talk someone out of a life long belief with a written paragraph of nonsense in a joke thread:lol:

    this is a humour website – everyone is aware of that aren’t they?

  • Hakeem

    folks,

    no where in Quran says the earth is flat.

    Infact there are many verses that support modern day science, e.g. the concept of birth & embryology, the creation of the universe with a huge explosion (big bang theory), the “reason” of the birth of sex gender is from the man (XY chromosomes) etc

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qur%27an_and_science

  • http://tyciol.livejournal.com Tyciol

    This is a bad list, you can win arguments about all these things, the difference being that the wrong side is stubborn and doesn’t admit evidence.

    • ed

      That’s not true. For example, if you have an argument with quality (Evelution) vs quantity (Creation), you find yourself in another argument; Qualtiy v.s Quantity. Even if you win that, one way or another, what if you have to pick quality of 8/10 with quantity of 10,000,000,000 vs quality of 9/10 and quantity of 50. Does that still mean the qualtity wins? You can’t say, becaus that’s apples and orenges.

  • j

    Whoever wrote this did a pretty poor job. These may in fact be the top 10 arguments that cant be won, but the author does a very poor job of framing the debate. I don’t think he understands what most of those debates are about.

  • http://www.toptenz.net TopTenz Master

    And with J’s final comment above I am closing comments on this list. Strange that a list titled Arguments that Can’t be Won is the most debated Top 10 list on the site. 😉