Logically speaking if there were millions of years of animals dying, the earth would have to be much thicker than it is. Cause every year there are 1.2 trillion animals killed... and thats mostly livestock.
People need to stop thinking we can somehow destroy the earth by burning a few things, its dumb.
The detriments of supposed fossil fuels is drastically over inflated.
The left are fighting shadow agendas and trying to convince us they are real.
God
Thats your answer.
If you dont like it, im sure someone versed in evolution can give you the "scientific" answer.
Dont have to understand, just read, hear and keep.
Why?
Revelation 1:1-3
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
Call me demi sexual then cause i only want people who arent just skin deep in beauty or character.
Everything is sixes and sevens. I remember that phrase from a movie back in 2000's i think?
I would like to add that the words used by social liberals have a foundation in their liberal or libertine philosophy, they tend to focus on the freedom of expression, but they do not consider the reality or the result of their expectation.
Conservatives, for all their disagreements, tend to root themselves in a more realistic mindset. Be it because of capitalism, or be it because of adherence to more doctrinal values, varies.
I personally dont feel like it would kill engagement to have the standards of the topic rubric, we can disregard the organization of it.
And i know making ultrated topics arent that hard, ive made a few.
If nothing else. I think the standard of bop should be consistent.
BOP
[Specifies which side is responsible for proving something.]
Topic creation
[Must be fair, with each side having a roughly equal opportunity to win.]
If if there is a quibble over what is an "roughly equal opportunity to win"
It can be addressed when putting the BOP
Then what sort of guideline should there be to have a topic?
Title
Description with bop
Short description?
Note. The note was put there by kohai without explanation.
I feel this undermines the point of topic rubrics and i feel these standards should be universal.
And unless im mistaken the topic rubric preceded the ultra debates?
@savant
Elo went to 1497. Intresting.
According to elo i should lose 27
So in 17 hours i should have 1481
Ill let ya know soon. Right now my rating is at 1508 and tomorrow it will go down due to losing to lucy.
Infact, there will be no desire to lust after someone. We will all be sons of God. No females, no concept of sexual desire.
There will be no concept of gayness as we will be given a body and soul without that leading desire to procreate.
You cant assert your understanding of a sinless existence while in a sinful mind. It is foolishness to you.
How do you know there is no sex in heaven?
Also, prove God fears gay and trans people.
Quick question. Is it sexual assault if a girl snuck up and jumped on my back and rode me without my consent?
I did tell her to get off and she did.
Its a child predator platform. Why are you playing it?
Sus meter rising.
You didnt even use the right verses. That was commandment to adam and noah/his family respectively.
1 corinthians 7:1-5
1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.
4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
1 corinthians 7:7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.
8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I.
9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
Matthew 19:10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
Fornication and adultery are.
Why? Because the soul is violated, the bible makes it clear that fornication, or sexual act outside of marriage violates the soul of a person.
What does this mean?
Your value is diminished, self value compromised, especially when that person makes no covenant with you or goes to another person.
Please pin unless you wish to edit/correct this.
Please pin unless you wish to edit/reword this.
Note: These standards only apply to ultra rated debates
Topic Creation Guidelines
Resolution
Must be specific, with a clear scope of what is and isn’t being debated.
Must be fair, with each side having a roughly equal opportunity to win.
Recommended formats:
“THBT: …”, “THW:…”, “Resolved: …”, or a Yes/No question. It is a good idea to limit the scope to a particular location or circumstance.
Descriptions
Short Description: Should summarize the topic.
Long Description:
Should clarify the resolution, specify the scope, set limits, and fix an evidence deadline for current events.
Burden of Proof
Specifies which side is responsible for proving something.
BoP Explanation:
Should clearly state what each side aims to establish and how the burden is shared or divided.
The goal is to provide a clear scope while allowing debaters creative freedom.
Definitions
Define any terms that could be interpreted in multiple ways (e.g., Justice, Capitalism). Definitions should be specific but not make the debate a truism.
Avoid defining terms only if the debate is about the definition itself.
Good vs. Bad ExamplesCriteria ✅ Good ❌ BadResolution
“THBT: On balance, US states ought to pass right-to-work laws”
“Right-to-work laws”
Long Description:
“Right-to-work laws are state-level regulations that prohibit agreements requiring employees to join a union... This debate focuses on whether or not states ought to pass these laws.” “Do people have a right to work?
”BoP Explanation “Shared equally. Pro argues that generally, under current circumstances, passing right-to-work laws is better... Con argues that allowing these agreements is better...” “Pro.” (No further explanation)
Definitions
Defines "Current circumstances," "On balance," "Right-to-Work Laws," etc.
Just incase I or someone else forget.
Votes are scored on a 5-point scale. A score of 4 or higher is required for a vote to be considered sufficient and count toward the outcome of a debate.
5 Excellent
In addition to meeting all the criteria for a sufficient vote (Score 4), the vote does at least TWO of the following:
Analyzes the overall strategies of each side and explains how the clash of these respective strategies led to the outcome.
Explains how a side could have argued more successfully to win on a point they lost on.
Compares the quality of evidence and sources and explains how this impacted the debate outcome.
Analyzes the clarity and presentation of arguments, explaining how points were either easily understandable or could have been improved.
Analyzes how the weight of arguments or margin of victory shifted over the course of the debate.
4 Sufficient
Votes solely based on relative strength of arguments made in the debate, and analysis of these arguments by the debaters, including relevant responses and weighing analysis.
Explains why the arguments analyzed are enough to determine the outcome, not ignoring key arguments that could change the outcome.
Displays neutrality, making clear that any personal opinions mentioned do not affect how arguments are weighed.
Votes based on the scope set by the debate resolution and rules.
If disagreeing with the debate's framing, the voter clearly establishes why their interpretation is more faithful and how it influences their vote.
3 Almost Sufficient Weighs arguments from each side against each other, but may fall prey to one or more of the following flaws:
Voting based on arguments not made in the debate.
Voting on arguments without considering rebuttals or further analysis.
Voting based on something other than argument strength (e.g., conduct).
Voting based on personal opinions rather than the debaters' analysis.
Ignoring one or more key arguments or pieces of evidence.
Displaying significant bias that calls neutrality into question.
Not voting based on the scope set by the resolution and rules.
Voting based on their own framing without sufficient reasoning.
2 Insufficient Addresses an argument or arguments made in the debate but does not weigh arguments from each side against each other.
1 Irrelevant
Does not address arguments made in the debate.
When i was 15 a girl was talking sweet to me, then physically abused me when she was angry.
Good thing i got away from her that day. she was very attractive though.
Again. You seem to be missing the point lynch. Read this slowly.
Equality of creation.
Not power, not libery (as applied to politics) not fiances, not voting.
Creation.
To the unclean all things are unclean
Titus 1:15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
Referring to language of the constitution. Not as a philosophical talking point.
Context is king, when someone asserts what america was "founded" on, then we look at the foundation.
Truely, your expectations and pessimistic is shocking.
In what world do you assume people will always politically and morally determine the same thing?
The nonsense of left being for the minority has been exposed via the works of antifa and silence of the blm.
The majority of left leaning people dont embrace gender ideology, much less transgender, they embrace the idea of being heard and equal representation.
And lets not even get into the gerrymandering and false votes. How many people are classified as white instead of their actual race in certain settings, especially in criminal records.
