can someone explain easily how BOD works cause I make always a mess

Are you talking about Biochemical oxygen demand?

BOD is the abbreviation for Biochemical Oxygen Demand, which measures the amount of dissolved oxygen microorganisms need to break down organic matter in water. A higher BOD indicates a greater amount of organic pollution, which can deplete oxygen in aquatic ecosystems and harm aquatic life. It is a key parameter for assessing water quality and the effectiveness of wastewater treatment plants. 

burden kf proof..... 🤧

I'm dyslexic, idk why it took the D lol

Burden of Proof - The obligation to prove an assertion or claim.

"When two parties are in a discussion and one makes a claim that the other disputes, the one who makes the claim typically has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim, especially when it challenges a perceived status quo." - Wikipedia

https://debate.miraheze.org/wiki/Burden_of_Proof

https://ddo.fandom.com/wiki/Burden_Of_Proof

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)#:~:text=The%20burden%20of%20proof%20is%20usually%20on%20the%20person%20who,the%20person%20who%20lays%20charges."

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CJQT_PS9k82QkgrsyTQMKaQ90uY9yubVT0KPMR9XFcc/edit?pli=1&tab=t.0

. . .

I can't explain it well,

Maybe because I don't understand it too well myself.

I think I usually just place BOP on both debaters.

Besides, maybe the BOP shifts, the more proof one gives.

Do you have any examples of the debates where it has been a difficulty?

Burden of proof is the millstone that hangs around the neck of all theists.

And denial of such is the other millstone that they drag along behind themselves.

Whereas BOD is the Big Orange Dipstick.

my debate on pantheism

I laughed.

Some might regard pantheism as buying a stairway to heaven.

"Pantheism is the most unique faith which demonstrates atheism"

Maybe "unique" was not the best word to use?

Though maybe it was, I'm not quite sure what you meant by unique.

It also might have been better to only go with one claim to prove, than two.

Though I get it that sometimes one wants to discuss whether something is true, and also discuss the ramifications if X is true.

. . .

You can possibly decrease BOP on such debates,

By including in the description that if anyone accepts the debate, they accept that the BOP in the debate is to be equally shared.

And/Or that they must argue an alternative to Pantheism.

Burden of proof is the millstone that hangs around the neck of all theists.

Not really. There is no rule which says I need to prove my claims.

@debate on pantheism

I think people just had some trouble understanding what it was that you were debating.

Clear title and description, as well as goalposts are often useful in a debate.

Sets win conditions, limits what is debated,

so why if I say the opposite with proofs theists gets mad? anyway they don't have rules to prove to anybody what they say

so why if I say the opposite with proofs theists gets mad

I dont get mad. You can ask for proof as much as you want. You wont get any proof from me. I will never prove my God to you. My belief doesnt depend on evidence, because divine belief isnt contingent on anything.

it's not meant for the personal belief, cause me too I believe in something which is nature(and Marx) but meant for the ones that jiggles around religion as an institution. Those are the ones that if you ask proofs for what they say they can't even answer, not everyone is like this but I hope I explained well myself

Certainly, we can make claims to our hearts content.

So, A = B = C = D.

Therefore a GOD must exist.

wrong on a, b, c.

A=B=C=D=E=F=G=H=I=L=M=N=O=P=Q=R=S=T=U=V=Z=X=Y=J=K=W=1=2=3=4=5=6=7=8=9=0

That’s all the proof we need. Thanks.

@#7

As soon as good, evil, harm, meaning, oughts, ideals, morality, ethics, truth. Pop up,

Rather than expected to occur, or consistent with framework of a subjective system.

I think Burden of Proof often pops up as well.

I imagine it's easier to disprove or argue an idea unlikely,

Than to have to suggest an alternative.

I sometimes wonder what many Atheists of various places and time 'do believe,

But lot of the Reddit threads I've looked up, 'lot of the comments are Atheism is just the nonbelief or disbelief in God.

Thanks Pierree, I must have miscalculated.

Basically atheism is a state of mind relative to conditioning, whereby an individual organic data processing unit tends not to be keen to run with certain creation and existence hypotheses that fall under the general umbrella of religion, wherein it is usually proposed that the fundamental basis of creation and existence is some sort of super-human.

Quite often said proposals have an additional tendency to demand the performance of varying ritualistic behaviour, which some individual organic data processing units (often referred to as atheist), find a tad ridiculous.

Atheists, like most people, believe in things without definitive proof, but they often differentiate these beliefs from religious ones by focusing on what is considered plausible based on evidence and logic. For example, they might accept the existence of other people's consciousness based on strong evidence and social cues, or trust that a friend is telling the truth about a simple fact, even without demanding absolute, tangible proof for every detail. 

Did you know that 108 billion people have lived on Earth?

Well said

Accept, without definitive proof, but with some reasonable degree of certainty...Like, the sun will continue to shine for a while longer.

Whereas "belief" assumes certainty without the need for reasonable proof...Like, there is a magic super-human what controls everything...So where is it?...Doesn't matter because I believe it.

I'm dyslexic, idk why it took the D lol

I wouldn't complain if someone took my D

I think here D means vitamin.

I think here D means vitamin.

I think "D" here means no Dip, Sherlock

Too many slangs to deal with.