The Instigator
Stupidape
Pro (for)
The Contender
Hugolm
Con (against)

Atheist evolution vs creationism.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Hugolm has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/13/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 weeks ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 257 times Debate No: 96965
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (20)
Votes (0)

 

Stupidape

Pro

Atheist evolution vs Creationism. I will take the atheist evolution point of view, my opponent the creationism side.


Structure
R1 Acceptance & definitions
R2 Arguments
R3 Rebuttals
R4 Defense

Burden of proof
Burden of proof will be shared equally. This is because I am making the affrimative claim and the instiagator, yet am arguing for what is normally accepted in the scientific community. Therefore, the burdens of proof cancel each other out resulting in neutral 50/50 burden of proof.

Further explanation of r1 setup. First round is just for acceptance and definitions if need be. Common definitions are assumed, unless otherwise stated and agreed upon.

Round two each person will make their argument, but no direct responses to the other person' argument. Focus on making a convincing argument that if not for your opponent's rebuttal would sell your audience. This is the only round to make new arguments for your case.

Round three each person will respond directly to their opponent's round two argument pointing out any logical fallacies and attempt to find flaws.

Round four each person defends their round argument against their opponent's round three argument. For example if I say that is a cherry picking fallacy in round three in response to my opponents round two, my opponent would explain why me calling their argument a cherry picking fallacy is incorrect.

Thank you in advance for accepting the debate.
Hugolm

Con

Creationism, Creationism is the religious belief that the universe and life originated "from specific acts of divine creation," as opposed to the scientific conclusion that they came about through natural processes. By saying you are opposed to creationism you are taking the atheist point of view meaning you do not believe in the existence of God nor that there is a God, but how can that be, if you believe in science what do you believe? do you believe that there was a big bang, well then if you do, specify, when God created the world who knows? there might have been a loud bang, maybe the loudest, biggest bang you could possibly imagine, but what are you saying? are you saying that nothing turned into something. How can that be. And if you believe that monkeys turned into humans, how can that be? If that was the case why aren't monkeys evolving into humans now, there is absolutely no proof and is there proof that God created the world or that God is even real, but it is all down to choice, and freedom, freedom to choose what you believe, but it make more sense to believe that there is a loving God and a God that created the world and us Humans and animals, Charles Darwin even doubted his theories and admitted in his death bed.
Debate Round No. 1
Stupidape

Pro

Definition, creationism "Creationism, Creationism is the religious belief that the universe and life originated "from specific acts of divine creation," as opposed to the scientific conclusion that they came about through natural processes."

I agree.

Thank you for accepting the debate and being respectful.

R2 Arguments

Alternate explanations for origins

The weight of the scientific evidence shows there is not enough evidence for God to believe in God. Scientific evidence supports the theories that the universe formed from another universe, the multi verse theories. [0] Then, a big bang or series of big bangs occurred. This is the big bang theory and string theories respectively. [1][2]

Note all these theories back up the scientific premise of atheism evolution. Just as multiple theories on how photosynthesis evolved all back up the theory of evolution.

After the universe was created and the big bang occurred, Earth was formed. There was no life on Earth, but abiogenesis occurred. [3] Again, there are several theories on how exactly the first microorganism occurred, but all back up abiogenesis.

Eventually, the first microorganism via evolution evolved into more and more complex lifeforms. This is consistent with Darwin's theory of evolution. Note, Darwin's theory is not the only theory, there is also another scientific theory of evolution created by Lamarck. [4] Again, both theories reinforce the hypothesis of evolution. Effectively, my opponent would have to disprove both Darwin's and Lamarck theories to win. Darwin's is the more likely theory and carries much more weight.

As for God, there is no scientific evidence for God or any other supernatural being. Considering the number of people on the planet, this lowers the chances of God existing. Also, consider the number of fields science covers. Think if we look for unicorns in ten supermarkets and find none, we can conclude there is a low probability that unicorns exist. If we then look in another ten supermarkets and find none, this further reduces the chance. Now extend the search to the entire world, the Moon, and Mars and we find no unicorns. This doesn't 100% disprove the existence of unicorns, but it lowers the chances. After-all in another dimension in a far away galaxy unicorns could exist. The same is true with God.

Thanks for debating, I look forward to counting this debate.

Sources
0. http://www.space.com...
1. https://science.nasa.gov...
2. http://science.howstuffworks.com...
3. http://atheism.about.com...
4. http://www.differencebetween.net...
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
20 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Zaephou 3 weeks ago
Zaephou
Wow StupidApe, have you actually become an atheist? Well done :D!

As for the debate title though, evolution does not correlate with atheism whatsoever.

:)
Posted by Stupidape 3 weeks ago
Stupidape
Of course I forgive you, although there isn't much to forgive.
Posted by stcornerap 3 weeks ago
stcornerap
Stupidape: Thank you I needed that. You're right, my view of atheism was skewed and I apologize. You're comment lead me to a little research and then to the realization that I had just forgotten what it felt like to be an atheist. I felt the same way you do. Do you forgive me, can we still be friends? :)
Posted by canis 3 weeks ago
canis
Evolution you can watch in a lab..Creationism you can "watch" in your own head...
Posted by Stupidape 3 weeks ago
Stupidape
"We all choose to put our faith in something. I guess your right that your faith isn't in Science, your faith is in atheism." stcornerap

Thank you for continuing the discussion. You seem to misunderstand how atheism and faith work. Faith is positive like hot, love, or hate. The opposite of hot is cold. The opposite of love is apathy. The opposite of hate is apathy. This is because cold and apathy are negative also known as a lack of heat, love, and hate.

Cold means the temperature is relatively low, there is little heat in the room. Apathy means you feel little emotion towards a person, place or object. Atheism means you have a lack of faith.

From a Christian point of view, most people have their faith in the wrong place. Instead of in Jesus, they put their faith in a heathen religion. This would be misplaced faith from a Christian point of view. Instead, an atheist has a lack of faith. The faith could be in Christ. Yet, there wouldn't be enough faith to call the person a Christian.

Therefore, personally I would say my faith is in Jesus Christ, yet there is so little faith, that I call myself an agnostic or atheist depending upon which side of the bed I woke up on. Make sense now?
Posted by stcornerap 3 weeks ago
stcornerap
We all choose to put our faith in something. I guess your right that your faith isn't in Science, your faith is in atheism. I guess Science is a tool that you use to try to debunk what I put my faith in lol :) I see science as a tool that makes my choice of faith grander. If muliverses turn out to be real that would be an awesome discovery. But not an answer for creation or a way to disprove God. It could be possible that there are a gizillion universes but who created them. For the Christian it just reveals to us more of God's workmanship, for the Atheist it leaves you the task of proving that God didn't create the other gazillian universes. I can't prove to you that God exists, if I could I'm sure Oprah would bring her show back for me! :) But God can prove it to the individual who puts their faith in him. I was an atheist for the 1st 30+ years of my life and there wasn't anything anyone could say to me to make me believe otherwise. It wasn't until I surrendered of my own choosing that God revealed to me that he was real. With out knowing for yourself that God is real none of it makes sense and you would rather have any other answer in the world. But when you know for yourself that God is real you see that it's the only answer and the only way that it all makes sense. This has been really fun dude. I appreciate you, I really do.
Posted by Stupidape 3 weeks ago
Stupidape
"On the other hand we have hypotheses and theories that yes of course can lead to answers, but wouldn't you agree that more often than not the answers we find lead us to more questions. As would be with the multiverse. Earlier I took claim to the fact that believing in God takes faith, is science any different? Doesn't it take faith to commit your life to a hypothesis? Don't you have to have faith in Science? " stcornerap

Overall, science seems to give more answers than questions. There is a certain level of mystery that remains in the universe. Yet, we know many concepts like the theory of gravity that would have been very difficult for ancient people to predict.

It takes discipline to stay on target and be scientific. Since atheism is lack of belief in God or faith, I don't see it taking faith in science. By the very nature of science it is a skeptical point of view. That's why there is the vigorous scientific method.

Nevertheless, many people put blind faith in scientific teachings. For example a science teacher tells students x is true, and they never question x. Which within itself is unscientific. Since to truly be a scientist you must take a skeptical point of view. To just blindly accept and regurgitate scientific truths is putting your faith in the establishment and scientific teachings.
Posted by stcornerap 3 weeks ago
stcornerap
I would give credit to the Christian God as I am a Christian. Debating religion is it's own challenge, sometimes it seems more complicated than multiverses :) I think it very important to continue advancements in science and knowledge. I'm right there with you and agree with everything you're saying, I just see it differently. I see science as man figuring out how God did it. How did God create our bodies, water cycles, weather, the world, the universe etc. and of course multiverses if they exist. It doesn't matter how many mustiverses we discover and what we discover within them, we will still be left with the question of where did all this new stuff come from? What created it? We have thousands of years of evidence for God on one hand and yes to believe it requires faith. On the other hand we have hypotheses and theories that yes of course can lead to answers, but wouldn't you agree that more often than not the answers we find lead us to more questions. As would be with the multiverse. Earlier I took claim to the fact that believing in God takes faith, is science any different? Doesn't it take faith to commit your life to a hypothesis? Don't you have to have faith in Science? I have faith in science, I also have faith in God who I believe is the creator of science. I believe God is the answer to all things, but that in no way limits my thirst for knowledge, and understanding. It just changes perspective and motive. God and Science don't have to work against each other, the opposition is a choice both on the part of the Scentist and the believer. There are a lot of believing scientist. Just as you can't make a definitive scientific breakthrough without sincere faith and effort, you can't make a spiritual one either. Believing in God doesn't take anything away from your life, but it could add something you didn't even know you were missing. Not just today but possibly for eternity.
Posted by canis 3 weeks ago
canis
Evolution yon can watch in a lab..Creationism you can "watch" in your own head...
Posted by Stupidape 3 weeks ago
Stupidape
Didn't know about the multi-verse theory being untestable.

"The multiverse argument is a well-founded philosophical proposal but, as it cannot be tested, it does not belong fully in the scientific fold. Read The Hidden Reality with enjoyment, but beware its misleading title. Greene is not presenting aspects of a known reality; he is telling of unproven theoretical possibilities."

The problem is though if we take everything away from science that is untestable, we would have to eliminate entire branches of science. Nevertheless, there is evidence that supports a multi-verse could exist.

I have another way to explain the situation, we have no way to test the multi-verse theory with today's knowledge, tomorrow we might possess the knowledge to test the multi-verse notion.

Perhaps more importantly to which God would you give credit if additional evidence for multiple universes was found? Multiple religions could stake claim as their God creating the additional evidence. Yet, how would we know? If multiple universes were discovered Deism would benefit the most in my opinion.

http://www.nature.com...
http://www.space.com...
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.