The Instigator
princearchitect
Pro (for)
Winning
18 Points
The Contender
gametimer
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Creation vs Evolution

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
princearchitect
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/28/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 954 times Debate No: 75914
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

princearchitect

Pro

This is my first debate, I will be debating in favor of Creation.
Let you're opening be accepting the debate & you're argument
against creation. I thank you in advance for accepting this debate.
gametimer

Con

I am glad of the fact that you wanted me to challenge you. For my opening statement, I would like to point out we are arguing over Christianity creationism. Firstly, I would like to start with the story of Noah's Ark. So a man in the middle of a desert had been told it was going to rain for 40 days and nights. So he builds a boat large enough to carry a couple from every species. Firstly where in the world did he get the wood to do this if he was in the middle of a desert? Secondly, wouldn't there still be dinosaurs if he took two of each animal? Third but not last, explain how Noah lived to be 900 or so.
Debate Round No. 1
princearchitect

Pro

My opponent opening statement lacks any compelling argument for the theory of evolution,
The origins of the universe, but he rather explain a hypothesis against the biblical account of Noah's Ark!

Now lets consider my opponent questions, he asks: Firstly, I would like to start with the story of Noah's Ark. So a man in the middle of a desert had been told it was going to rain for 40 days and nights. So he builds a boat large enough to carry a couple from every species. Firstly where in the world did he get the wood to do this if he was in the middle of a desert?

First of all, there is nowhere in the scriptures that implies Noah was in the middle of a desert in the construction of the ark,
So that assumption is an illogical hypothesis on the location of the ark during its construction.

My argument will give a detailed hypothesis of different elements of the ark explaining
1.How big was Noah"s Ark?
2.How was the ark big enough to hold the number of animals required?
3.How many animals needed to be brought aboard?
4.How were the animals gathered?
5.How could Noah"s family take care of all those animals?
6.The Conclusion.

A growing number of scientists believe that geological evidence indicates our world has undergone a catastrophic flood. This is causing them to question whether or not the biblical account of Noah"s ark could be true. Many people are rereading the Biblical description of the Ark to ascertain the feasibility of such a vessel to fulfill its designated purpose in light of present day knowledge of both zoology and our present day knowledge of shipbuilding.

1.How big was Noah"s Ark? "And God said unto Noah" Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt though make in the ark, and thou shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of" the length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. A window shalt thou make in the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it." (Gen. 6:14-16)
Most Hebrew scholars believe the cubit to have been no less than 18 inches long [45.72 centimeters]. This means that the Ark would have been at least 450 feet long [137.16 meters], 75 feet wide [22.86 meters] and 45 feet high [13.716000000000001 meters]. Noah"s Ark was said to have been the largest sea-going vessel ever built until the late nineteenth century when giant metal ships were first constructed. Its length to width ratio of six to one provided excellent stability on the high seas. In fact, modern shipbuilders say it would have been almost impossible to turn over. In every way, it was admirably suited for riding out the tremendous storms in the year of the flood.
These dimensions are especially interesting when compared to those given in the mythical, Babylonian account of the Ark. Here the ark is described as a perfect cube, extending 120 cubits in all directions and with nine decks. Such a vessel would spin slowly round and round in the water and from the standpoint of stability, would be a disaster.

2.How was the ark big enough to hold the number of animals required?

The total available floor space on the Ark would have been over 100,000 square feet, which would be more floor space than in 20 standard-sized basketball courts.
The total cubic volume would have been 1,518,000 cubic feet [462,686.4 cubic meters] --that would be equal to the capacity of 569 modern railroad stock cars.
Now comes the question, how many land-dwelling air breathing animals would have had to be taken aboard the ark to survive the flood?
According to Ernest Mayr, America"s leading taxonomist (deceased), there are over 1 million species of animals in the world
God only provided the Ark for the protection of humans and land-dwelling, air-breathing creatures. A huge number of animals would not need to be taken aboard the Ark because they are water dwellers.
Representatives would be expected to survive the catastrophe. With God"s protection against extinction during the Deluge, survival would have been assured. (Scene from The World that Perished, a Christian motion picture about the Flood)
However, the vast majority of these is capable of surviving in water and would not need to be brought aboard the ark. Noah need make no provision for the 21,000 species of fish or the 1,700 tunicates (marine chordates like sea squirts) found throughout the seas of the world, or the 600 echinoderms including star fish and sea urchins, or the 107,000 mollusks such as mussels, clams and oysters, or the 10,000 coelenterates like corals and sea anemones, jelly fish and hydroids or the 5,000 species of sponges, or the 30,000 protozoans, the microscopic single-celled creatures.
In addition, some of the mammals are aquatic. For example, the whales, seals and porpoises. The amphibians need not all have been included, nor all the reptiles, such as sea turtles, and alligators. Moreover, a large number of the arthropods numbering 838,000 species, such as lobsters, shrimp, crabs and water fleas and barnacles are marine creatures. And the insect species among arthropod are usually very small. Also, many of the 35,000 species of worms as well as many of the insects could have survived outside the Ark.

3.How many animals needed to be brought aboard?

Doctors Morris and Whitcomb in their classic book, The Genesis Flood state that no more than 35,000 individual animals needed to go on the ark. In his well-documented book, Noah"s Ark: A Feasibility Study, John Woodmorappe suggests that far fewer animals would have been transported upon the ark. By pointing out that the word "specie" is not equivalent to the "created kinds" of the Genesis account, Woodmorappe credibly demonstrates that as few as 2,000 animals may have been required on the ark. To pad this number for error, he continues his study by showing that the ark could easily accommodate 16,000 animals.

But, let"s be generous and add on a reasonable number to include extinct animals. Then add on some more to satisfy even the most skeptical. Let"s assume 50,000 animals, far more animals than required, were on board the ark, and these need not have been the largest or even adult specimens.
Remember there are really only a few very large animals, such as the dinosaur or the elephant, and these could be represented by young ones. Assuming the average animal to be about the size of a sheep and using a railroad car for comparison, we note that the average double-deck stock car can accommodate 240 sheep. Thus, three trains hauling 69 cars each would have ample space to carry the 50,000 animals, filling only 37% of the ark. This would leave an additional 361 cars or enough to make 5 trains of 72 cars each to carry all of the food and baggage plus Noah"s family of eight people. The Ark had plenty of space.
The bigger problem would have been the construction of the Ark. But the Bible indicates that Noah did this under Divine guidance and there is no reason to believe he did not hire additional workmen.
4.How were the animals gathered?

Another enormous problem some have posed is the problem of gathering of each kind of air-breathing land animal and bringing them aboard the Ark. However, the Genesis account indicates that God gathered the animals and brought them to Noah inside the Ark two by two. Some have suggested this may have involved the origin of animal migratory instincts or, at least, an intensification of it. We also know that most animals possess the ability to sense danger and to move to a place of safety.

5.How could Noah"s family take care of all those animals?

Once aboard, many have suggested that Noah"s problems really began, with only 8 people to feed and water, to provide fresh air and sanitationfor the huge menagerie of animals for a total of 371 days. However, a number of scientists have suggested that the animals may have gone into a type of dormancy. It has been said that in nearly all groups of animals there is at least an indication of a latent ability to hibernate or aestivate. Perhaps these abilities were supernaturally intensified during this period. With their bodily functions reduced to a minimum, the burden of their care would have been greatly lightened.

6.The Conclusion.

It is evident, when all the facts are examined that there is no scientific evidence that the biblical account of Noah"s ark is a myth or fable. The facts support the view that Noah"s ark was large enough to carry the number of animals required to repopulate the earth after the flood and that Noah and his family were capable of caring for the animals during their time on the Ark.

For my opponent must now tear down all the evidence supporting the Biblical account of Noah"s Ark.
Then in return build his case to refute the evidence,

He must tear down every scientific data presented in my rebuttal & the logical conclusion of the overwhelming evidence of
A global flood that is supported by science and in return build up his theory against the evidence!

I will wait on my opponent's rebuttal because I'm running out of characters in this argument to present evidence
supporting creation & why my faith in God is rational & logical.

http://www.christiananswers.net...
gametimer

Con

gametimer forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
princearchitect

Pro

It seems my opponent has forfeited the second round.
Allow me to use the third round to answer the other two questions my opponent presented to me, they consist of.
Wouldn't there still be dinosaurs if he took two of each animal? & explain how Noah lived to be 900 years or so?

Lets focus on the first question, wouldn't there still be dinosaurs if he took two of each animals?
So were dinosaurs on the Ark of Noah? In Genesis 6:19"20, the Bible says that two of every sort of land vertebrate (seven of the "clean" animals) were brought by God to the Ark. Therefore, dinosaurs (land vertebrates) were represented on the Ark.

How did those huge dinosaurs fit on the Ark?

Although there are about 668 names of dinosaurs, there are perhaps only 55 different "kinds" of dinosaurs. Furthermore, not all dinosaurs were huge like the brachiosaurus, and even those dinosaurs on the Ark were probably "teenagers" or young adults.

DOGS, WOLVES, AND COYOTES ARE PROBABLY FROM A SINGLE CANINE "KIND,"
SO HUNDREDS OF DIFFERENT DOGS WERE NOT NEEDED.

Creationist researcher John Woodmorappe has calculated that Noah had on board with him representatives from about 8,000 animal genera (including some now-extinct animals), or around 16,000 individual animals as a maximum number. When you realize that horses, zebras, and donkeys are probably descended from the horse-like "kind," Noah did not have to carry two sets of each such animal. Also, dogs, wolves, and coyotes are probably from a single canine "kind," so hundreds of different dogs were not needed.
According to Genesis 6:15 , the Ark measured 300 x 50 x 30 cubits, which is about 510 x 85 x 51 feet, with a volume of about 2.21 million cubic feet. Researchers have shown that this is the equivalent volume of over 500 semitrailers of space. 1
Without getting into all the math, the 16,000-plus animals would have occupied much less than half the space in the Ark (even allowing them some moving-around space).

Explain how Noah lived to be 900 years or so?

Long Lives in the Ancient Days
The first few humans recorded in the Bible, in particular the Old Testament, lived an exceedingly long number of years. Adam lived to the age of 930 years, his son Seth lived 912, his son Lamech lived 777 years, Lamech"s son Noah lived to 950 years, his son Shem lived 600 years. There is a pattern that shows up. Progressively, each generation lived shorter and shorter lives. Adam was the first human created and must have been nearly perfect. They were more perfect in health, size, and stature. Perhaps the first generations of humans lived such long lives because they were so close to the man that God created and what God creates was perfect from the beginning. That is until sin entered the human race. Sin is destructive and the continuing sin through the generations had a cumulative effect. By the time Abraham was born, the life spans had shrunk considerably.

Even though Abraham lived to 175 years, Moses lived only 120 years. The effects of the fall of man, which happened in the Garden of Eden, had an effect. The creation had fallen with the fall of man. God cursed the land after Adam and Eve sinned. No longer would the environment be perfect. Even nature itself would be feeling the effects of sin.

It seems my opponent has not only forfeited this debate, he has forfeited our other debate as well.
He has not come close to defending the theory of evolution, due to the overwhelming evidence in favor of creation & no rebuttals, it is clear I" am winning this debate, but we will give my opponent one more chance to respond. If he forfeits, I would encourage any logical thinking individual to vote in favor of me winning this debate! Thank you for you"re time and attention.

Read more: http://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com...

https://answersingenesis.org...
gametimer

Con

gametimer forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
princearchitect

Pro

After two straight forfeits, it seems my opponent has conceded this debate!!!
Vote Pro!
gametimer

Con

gametimer forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by princearchitect 1 year ago
princearchitect
It seems my opponent has forfeited his chances in this debate.
Please vote for Pro!!!
Posted by princearchitect 1 year ago
princearchitect
It seems my opponent has forfeited his chances in this debate.
Please vote for Pro!!!
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Lexus 1 year ago
Lexus
princearchitectgametimerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
princearchitectgametimerTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
princearchitectgametimerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Full forfeit.
Vote Placed by Nathaniel.Braswell 1 year ago
Nathaniel.Braswell
princearchitectgametimerTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited, which in my book gives Pro all the points.