Right, so the bible says it's true, therefore, it must be true? The bible says god exists because god says he exists, therefore, it must be true that god exists? That second question is circular reasoning at its best.
Unfortunately, it's not my problem nor do I really care how your life outside of
TH is. This is a debate, not a soap opera. Perhaps if you listened to why you're being ridiculed on here, you can apply that outside of
TH.
Don't act like you're the only group who gets dirt in their faces. Atheists get quite a lot as well. Trust me, a hell of a lot ram religion down people's throats. I'd go as far as to say the majority does, whether they want to or if it's simply a casual debate and it ends up happening.
I've been in these types of debates, and it is rare that I'll find a christian who not only knows what evolution, the scientific method, etc.. are, but can look at it objectively without putting their beliefs into the mix. I'd love to debate creation vs. evolution, however, before starting, you have to educate both sides on the faith or science. That alone can be frustrating as it usually can lead to shoving stuff down people's throats.
If one side doesn't understand evolution or faith in some detail, then the debate will fail because one or both sides are going "LALALALALALA not listening" and that's not an objective debate. I can honestly say, as can be seen on
TH, some christians automatically reject scientific theories before even entering the debate. Therefore, there's a huge bias to be overcome which usually results in a fail. The same applies to atheists who reject faith.
I think that educating both sides, in person or online, is very difficult.
The next thing to understand is that science demands proof, faith does not. Therefore, if I give proof, then you are usually expected to counter it with proof, however, that isn't always the case; it's faith, hence, non-proof. In an objective debate, that is disregarded immediately. If it is a subjective debate, then proof isn't valued a lot and so, it becomes rather pointless.
I have a few christian friends at university, in biology, and they are the exception. They understand science and their faith very well, accept both, don't contradict and can debate and analyze each independently. That is what makes for an excellent candidate to debate with, along with no insults no preaching, no converting, etc... .
Either someone writes up a very detailed post or gives good links to describe the scientific method, evolution, etc..., faith, god, etc..., or we're starting off on uneven and unstable terms, which is bound to make the debate unstable.