>>512969819
It presupposes an irrational universe. That everything is existence is a mere chance. That there is no order, no truth, no rationality, and of course, no purpose. It doesn't explain anything. At its best, it's simply a negative claim statement.

>>512970039
We base our entire lives off of partial knowledge on every topic of life. From the sciences, to history, to politics, and even to relationships. No one has full knowledge of any given topic. We exercise faith in every aspect of our daily lives whether we're conscious of it or not, and not talking in an exclusively religious context. To say that one must have an absolute degree of certainty or else the claim is false is absurd and irrational.

>>508403030
Ancestry surveys in the US are flawed, and this is noted when you read the fine details of these surveys. Americans tend to state their ancestry as being the "most recent deviation from the norm" on these surveys. In other words, you're 95% English ancestry but you have one great great grandmother that was half-German? The person will state that they're of German ancestry. Or, you're 90% English ancestry, but you've got a family member up the line that has some Norwegian in them? They'll mark Norwegian on their survey, despite having nothing but English names throughout their family. This comes from the culture as it's seen to be cool or interesting to have an heritage that's different or interesting. But it is a studied and noted fact about the topic.

Also, there's the fact that many just mark their ancestry as being "American". This is overwhelming done by people of British stock: in particular Scottish, English, and Scots-Irish. This is really popularly done through those in Appalachia, the Mid-Atlantic, and Midwest.

So those with English and Scottish ancestry is grossly underrepresented on these surveys and data maps.

That's not to say there wasn't and isn't a large portion of the country that does have some German ancestry, but it's grossly overrepresented.