That's true. I've been going hard on Military History for a little while now. It's really incredible what all has happened. One account I read about was from this guy who was a German Soldier, left stranded to die outside Stalingrad with 300,000 of his fellow soldiers. It was horrible, and the flow of propaganda from the Nazi state was trying to sugar coat the fact that they left several armies of loyal Germans to their deaths at the hands of the Russians, in the freezing Winter, with 1/5 provisions, for weeks. It was just madness.
The guy telling the story has like a whole realization that he's literally been fighting for evil this whole time, ruining lives because they were winning.
The lines get blurry in cases like the Battle of Grozny (1994). Chechnia politically seceded from russia after the USSR fell bc they hated the purges stalin had committed (literally loading them up into cattle cars for mass deportation).
In response, the Russian government sent some 40,000 conscripts to retake the city of Grozny. They underestimated the chechin's will to fight and suffered incredible losses. But the insurgent forced did not give a fook about the moral high ground and freely boobytrapped everything, piked the heads of the Russians on the roads, and hung captured Russians upside down in their fighting positions so Russians had to shoot at their comrades in order to even fight. They would order their snipers to shoot the legs, and freely shoot at the rescue parties. Or even or shoot the groin, to attack the morale of the Russians who would suffer a slow painful, humiliating death.
But the Russians were mostly teenage conscripts that, from hunger, stress, and a lack of discipline, were taking their frustrations out on the populace.
YEC is a claim that flies in the face of our modern understanding of the natural world. YEC is a model attempting to represemt reality and origins which leaves it subject to scientific scrutiny.
Yeah 1 came to my mind aswell. But the rate of nuclear meltdowns are pretty low so I haven't accepted. And gas Is volatile and freely accessible, used in murder a lot for that reason.
There are plenty of christians that accept science while also maintaining the central dogma of christianity, that Christ died and rose again for our sins. So science has a place in this debate. The title isn't "The bible supports YEC."
Yeah it really seems like it boils down to if one should read genesis literally or not. But science does speak on that, so whether or not YEC is true does help determine how one should read the creationist account in genesis.
Nah it wasn't meant to be a shot man. Oro had just commented "proof that you don't have to be right to win a debate." On a "trump will win the 2020 election" debate.
I made it very clear that I am not advocating a worldview. I even allowed deism because that's all my opponent's arguments indicate. But even under deism there was on real refutation of my core argument. It feels disingenuous to continuously label my position as naturalism rather than simply contingent on observable data.
While I do not think your vote is grounded in good reasons, I do not consider it unfair because you were persuaded by my opponent arguments. Caleber's vote awarded both conduct and sources which I think is unfair.
Thank you for voting. But the speed of light is not assumed, I referenced an experiment that demonstrated it, and it is consistently measured at that speed in every single experiment ever. My opponent agreed to the speed of light being constant, which necessarily means the distance is the light-year distance.
That's true. I've been going hard on Military History for a little while now. It's really incredible what all has happened. One account I read about was from this guy who was a German Soldier, left stranded to die outside Stalingrad with 300,000 of his fellow soldiers. It was horrible, and the flow of propaganda from the Nazi state was trying to sugar coat the fact that they left several armies of loyal Germans to their deaths at the hands of the Russians, in the freezing Winter, with 1/5 provisions, for weeks. It was just madness.
The guy telling the story has like a whole realization that he's literally been fighting for evil this whole time, ruining lives because they were winning.
He's the most decorated US Marine in history. He was awarded five Navy Crosses.
Chesty Puller's biography, "Marine!" lol
He likes the green of the smog
At least there's something to attack
Undefeatable ain't looking so bad now huh lol
I love a good ethics debate, but I've never seen this show, so Im gonna pass on this one.
The lines get blurry in cases like the Battle of Grozny (1994). Chechnia politically seceded from russia after the USSR fell bc they hated the purges stalin had committed (literally loading them up into cattle cars for mass deportation).
In response, the Russian government sent some 40,000 conscripts to retake the city of Grozny. They underestimated the chechin's will to fight and suffered incredible losses. But the insurgent forced did not give a fook about the moral high ground and freely boobytrapped everything, piked the heads of the Russians on the roads, and hung captured Russians upside down in their fighting positions so Russians had to shoot at their comrades in order to even fight. They would order their snipers to shoot the legs, and freely shoot at the rescue parties. Or even or shoot the groin, to attack the morale of the Russians who would suffer a slow painful, humiliating death.
But the Russians were mostly teenage conscripts that, from hunger, stress, and a lack of discipline, were taking their frustrations out on the populace.
Yeah I think I agree with that.
Oh that's a good one lol. Do You think that war is always murder? Also Josh powell killed his kids with gasoline, is where my mind went
YEC is a claim that flies in the face of our modern understanding of the natural world. YEC is a model attempting to represemt reality and origins which leaves it subject to scientific scrutiny.
Yeah 1 came to my mind aswell. But the rate of nuclear meltdowns are pretty low so I haven't accepted. And gas Is volatile and freely accessible, used in murder a lot for that reason.
Yeah that's almost exactly what I was thinking. Still can't decide tho...
There are plenty of christians that accept science while also maintaining the central dogma of christianity, that Christ died and rose again for our sins. So science has a place in this debate. The title isn't "The bible supports YEC."
Yeah it really seems like it boils down to if one should read genesis literally or not. But science does speak on that, so whether or not YEC is true does help determine how one should read the creationist account in genesis.
"...spoiling what could have been an interesting debate, it wasn't." That made me lol.
Thank you for voting.
Interesting strategy
Touring poor areas was deemed bad since the dolphin of Hippo.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/qcurtius.com/2019/06/08/the-dolphin-of-hippo/amp/
Yes, there is quite a bit there, so I will make a post and link it here so you can find it easily. Seems more appropriate than discussing it here.
Who hurt you?
Okay, to what degree? Like in the ability to string together coherent posts? Or acquire followers?
Inferior to what? A nuke? An ant?
Nah it wasn't meant to be a shot man. Oro had just commented "proof that you don't have to be right to win a debate." On a "trump will win the 2020 election" debate.
I think this is the best example that you don't have to be right to win a debate lol
I made it very clear that I am not advocating a worldview. I even allowed deism because that's all my opponent's arguments indicate. But even under deism there was on real refutation of my core argument. It feels disingenuous to continuously label my position as naturalism rather than simply contingent on observable data.
While I do not think your vote is grounded in good reasons, I do not consider it unfair because you were persuaded by my opponent arguments. Caleber's vote awarded both conduct and sources which I think is unfair.
While there's a lot wrong with what you said, I suppose I shouldn't argue with you in the comments about it. Thank you for voting.
Thank you for voting. But the speed of light is not assumed, I referenced an experiment that demonstrated it, and it is consistently measured at that speed in every single experiment ever. My opponent agreed to the speed of light being constant, which necessarily means the distance is the light-year distance.
I addressed that in CR3, FR1, and FR2.
I addressed essentially every point raised, and there was no considerable objection to the argument I had made. I did not violate the rules.
Haha, yeah since this one was unrated I went with the different strategy where instead of carefully planning my arguments I just argued off the dome.
Thank you for voting.
Thank you for voting, but I don't think the conduct point was deserved.
Thank you for voting
Vote bump
Vote bump
Right on
Vote bump
Vote bump
Thank you for this debate
A two vote tie lol...Philosophy in a nutshell.
Haha I mean comment #74
See #72
Thank you for voting
Thank you for your vote
Ive never been one to make a stink about losing, but what specific wording did you have a problem with?
Hmm, your conduct violation seems unfair. I engaged his position directly.
Vote bump
Vote bump
Anyone else feel like voting?