Same mistakes as you always make, an inability to separate existence and applicability. By your own criteria the existence of love is not a matter of opinion it is a fact, individual experiance of love is not a fact neither in type or strength of feeling.
Same falsehoods as always, materialism...
No, they have a higher tendency to dissipate over time if they are detrimental - neutral effects can hang around because they aren't selected against, but the effect is only strongly relevant for issues occurring before the end of the reproductive span. They can also piggyback with genes that do...
Only if they restricted themselves to marrying within the family.
Its pretty clear that the genetic component of homosexuality is based on more than one gene and its entirely possible that those genes can provide generally beneficial effects in isolation and combinations can do so as well.
There is a genetic component to homosexuality, whether it is entireley genetic or partly so with epigenetic and environmental components is a separate discussion.
You would need to first establish a reason why it would be an arguent against evolution considering that such behaviour is...
What scientific indoctrination? The similarity between animals such as the canines is obvious, it makes sense that they are biologically related. The lesser similarity between groups of mammals draws the same conclusion and our similarity to the apes intuitively means that we are related to...
Having been raised without religious indoctrination I would say that thinking that we are indeed related to the other animals is both natural and intuitive. Just observe a chimp and you can see that we are related.
Completely wrong. Atheism does not view the world as ultimately meaningless it just views the world as without having a special meaining externally imposed by deities.
Its not circumstantial evidence. That you reject a valid way of establishing facts via personal knowledge establishes the "veracity" of any claim to seek the truth.
No they don't have the same distortion issues, that is patently obvious when you look out the window while on the ground.
Its the roundness of a sphere, any reasonable number of long distance flights in different directions will illustrate that. I have made such flights from the UK (Brazil...
A more valid charge as Judaism does not acknowledge previous releigions as being the source of some tales.
Of course the Flood story as interpreted by most is not a true story.
As you admit they claim that the PREVIOUS texts are sources that rules out a charge of plagiarism.
It doesn't matter what you do with the words, how much you add, change or remove, its only plagiarism if you do not admit where the original concepts come from.
Thanks for ably demonstrating that you have no clue as to what plagiarism is. It does not matter how much you incorporate or how much you change, what matters is if you pretend that its ONLY your work and not based on any earlier work. That is the meaning as "as one's own", i.e. that it is new...
No its not, for someone who claims to hold academia in regard you don't seem to know what plagiarism actually entails.
If I take a whole hunk of text and add to it and change part of it no plagiarism occurs as long as the original source is acknowledged, which Islam does,