Come visit me. We don't have black people here. You will be a hit with the local ladies.
Sorry I'm not falling for that one again

.
My only weapons in argument are logic. If something can be proven to be true, I would be an idiot not to believe it. However, very little about evolution passes the truth test. Atheists however fanatically believe otherwise, just as some theists fanatically believe God created the earth.
Actually, you're going to need more than logic to disprove/prove scientific theories. You can't simply "logic up" the theory of electromagnetism or gravity. You need concrete, repeatable observations. That's how physics works. This isn't math.
To someone like me, atheism and theism are just competing ideologies. Neither has a monopoly on science, the truth or goodness. Heck, almost all of the killing in the last 200 years has been done by secular atheists.
Actually, I'm pretty sure atheism has a monopoly on science. Theists believe a magical fairy created everything and is responsible for keeping everything in order. They make assertions that cannot be proven. Period. It's easy - I pewep do declare there are magical invisible unicorns that keep everything in harmony. Prove me wrong.
That's not how atheists or scientists work. If you make a claim, you have to prove it. YOU have the burden of proof.
Stop being argumentative now. You used the an ad hominem attack vs wikipedia and I essentially said that would be silly because wikipedia is a very credible source 88% of the time (it is literally 88% accurate).
No, not at all. I said wikipedia is LITERALLY more accurate than the encyclopedia britannica:
Chesney
Wikipedia is either right or wrong. The truth isn't subject to opinion.
I know, I was telling you why you're wrong to automatically discount wikipedia as a source. Don't try to change the subject.
A booty is why god invented my balls.
Did I say scientific theories, or evolutionary theory? I don't remember.
That's ok, let me refresh you. This is what you said:
1. What does any of that have to do with the scientific method and this thread?
I am really fond of the idea of gravity. And water being wet.
Funny, me too. I also know for a fact the "theory" of evolution has just as much credence to it as current gravitational theories do. And guess what, it is the cornerstone of modern biology and genetics.
I am not gay bro. No matter how cute you are.
Don't bash it till you try it.
It's not an ad hominem. You should learn what logical fallacies are before trying to apply the idea in a debate.
An ad hominem would be me saying you're wrong because you're stupid. Or because you're black. Or because you like to sell your ass on the street corner.
I know what an ad hominem attack is. Let me refresh you again, you called me ignorant and said:
"I pewep will continue to assert things without proof because I am lazy."
Without stating why I was ignorant or even attempting to debate my quotes because you know damn well that you can't.
What I am saying is that you don't have any facts to back up your position, and that is why your position in debate lacks merit, because IT LACKS MERIT. It's axiomatic.
LOL. It's as if I have been saying nothing this entire time.
Step 1: GO BACK and *CLICK* my fucking sources.
Step 2: Read the page
Step 3: Don't post stupid shit and keep saying the same thing over and over even after I provide sources.
It wasn't a strawman. I used your definition. I don't understand the controversy.
Now i'm getting annoyed.
This is what you said:
Guerilla: A hypothesis doesn't need to be tested based on the definitions you posted.
This is what I actually said: A
hypothesis is an educated guess, based on observation.
Usually (and I'm being polite - ALWAYS), a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but not proven to be true.
You're not using my definition. You're making up one and misrepresenting my position. That's called a straw man attack.
Just prove evolution bro. We can argue definitions all day. You still haven't shown one factual proof for evolution, have you?
I already did. Click the links I've posted.
C'mon now, it can't be that hard. Apparently it's accessible to people in Grade 8.
It is, that's why I'm wondering what went wrong in your education.