The Instigator
64bithuman
Con (against)
Winning
2 Points
The Contender
NothingSpecial99
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Creationism: God created a perfect universe in 7 days

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
64bithuman
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/22/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 702 times Debate No: 74006
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

64bithuman

Con

1st Round: Acceptance

2nd Round: Arguments

3rd-5th Rounds: Rebuttals

I'll be arguing that god didn't created the world, but rather that we are products of evolution/big bang.

Pro would take the biblical side: god created in seven days, etc. etc.

I assume god doesn't exist in the first place.

Thanks!
NothingSpecial99

Pro

I would gladly accept
Debate Round No. 1
64bithuman

Con

Thanks Pro, I look forward to this debate!

I’ll break my points up into four contentions.

1. Evolutionary proof

Despite the attempts of the Catholic church, etc. etc. Genesis makes no room for evolution. It’s fairly clear in Genesis 1: “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.”

Evolutionary theory is a bit like Newton’s theory of Gravity. It’s a theory that is fairly easy to prove. If god had created a perfect human being, then why do our teeth rot in our mouths? Why do we get wisdom teeth? Why do we have the remnants of a third eyelid? What good is the gripping plantaris muscle in our feet (only in 9% of the population)? What good is our appendix? Why do we have the remnants of a tail? What is with Darwin’s point on about 10% of human ears?

Genesis creation makes no explanation for such things. Evolutionary theory does. Our appendix is an organ that used to aid in a leaf-heavy diet, the third eyelid is actually a remnant from before we were even ape-like, wisdom teeth are often crooked because our diets have changed and evolutionary selection has let our jaws shrink, the plantaris muscle is a remainder from the days when we needed to grip with our feet, the tail is obviously a useless remainder from when we needed tails.


2. The problem of genetics with Adam/Eve


How could the human race spring from only two people? It’s scientifically impossible. Human genetics simply doesn’t allow it. Genesis only gives us seven children from Adam and Eve, and we know that genetically, when children are products of incestuous relationships, and when the gene pool is so small, as a species we’d be rife with genetic problems. Even if Eve had 50 children, the gene pool would be dangerously limited.

What about races? Did Eve have an Asian child, an African child, a Caucasian child, and a Latino child?

The chances of Adam and Eve’s children surviving the terrible effects of inbreeding are very small.

Tied with genetics, we now know that the Y-Chromosomal Adam lived some 150 thousand years ago, while Mitochondrial Eve lived some 130 thousand years ago. There is a large gap that genesis doesn’t account for.


3. Old Earth proof

Biblically, the earth is around 5000 years old if you count the generations. Trusting an ancient book over things like carbon dating and modern science is just a baffling to me. Most scientists assume that the earth is around 4.55 Billion years old.

Even if you don’t want to trust that idea (as it can’t be proven directly from the materials left on earth) you can trust that we’ve found sedimentary rocks at around 3.8-3.9 billion years old by radiometric dating.

(http://www.talkorigins.org...)

We’ve taken readings from meteorites expected to have been formed with the same materials as the other planets in our solar system:

Type

Number
Dated

Method

Age (billions
of years)


Chondrites (CM, CV, H, L, LL, E)

13

Sm-Nd

4.21 +/- 0.76

Carbonaceous chondrites

4

Rb-Sr

4.37 +/- 0.34

Chondrites (undisturbed H, LL, E)

38

Rb-Sr

4.50 +/- 0.02

Chondrites (H, L, LL, E)

50

Rb-Sr

4.43 +/- 0.04

H Chondrites (undisturbed)

17

Rb-Sr

4.52 +/- 0.04

H Chondrites

15

Rb-Sr

4.59 +/- 0.06

L Chondrites (relatively undisturbed)

6

Rb-Sr

4.44 +/- 0.12

L Chondrites

5

Rb-Sr

4.38 +/- 0.12

LL Chondrites (undisturbed)

13

Rb-Sr

4.49 +/- 0.02

LL Chondrites

10

Rb-Sr

4.46 +/- 0.06

E Chondrites (undisturbed)

8

Rb-Sr

4.51 +/- 0.04

E Chondrites

8

Rb-Sr

4.44 +/- 0.13

...there are many others but I need
to conserve space.































So with many methods of dating calculation and several different meteorites we’ve come pretty unanimously to about 4.5 Billion years.



4. Problems with an unreliable text

There are several immediate contradictions in Genesis. In an effort to prove that Genesis is terrible text to trust, I’ll point them out.

Gen 1:25-27 “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”

Gen 2:22 “And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.”

In the first two chapters, there is an immediate contradiction. Did god not create man and woman after he made animals?

Why trust a book of myths, like the tale of Noah? Just like I pointed out before, to assume that the entire animal kingdom came from a huge group of pairs is just ignorance on a baffling scale. Having such a small gene pool to work from, most animals would have been wracked with genetic disease.

Not to mention the fact that several of the stories in genesis come from earlier myths, like the flood myth coming from the Israelites contact with Sumerian and Akkadian tribes, plus the ancient tale of Gilgamesh (Genesis is at times a point by point rip-off of Gilgamesh). Akkadian versions tell the story of the god Ea, god of the waters, who warns Atra-hasis of an impending flood and instructs him to craft an ark to survive it.

The Garden of Eden, for example, comes from Gilgamesh. Man is created from soil, lives in a perfect garden with animals, is introduced to a woman, accepts food from the woman, covers his nakedness, and is banished. Ever wonder why Satan appears as a snake in genesis? It’s from Gilgamesh: a serpent steals a plant of immortality from the hero. Ninti, the Sumerian Goddess, is created from the rib of man to heal him.

For example, from Gilgamesh:

“All the living beings that I had I loaded on it, I had all my kith and kin go up into the boat, all the beasts and animals of the field”

And from Genesis 7:

“Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, together with his wife and the wives of his three sons, entered the ark. They had with them every wild animal according to its kind...”

Or the tale of Emesh and Enten, the source of Cain/Abel, from the 3rd Millennium BCE, tells the story of two boys birthed from the god Enlil and the earth who both bring an offering to Enlil but Enten gets infuriated with Emesh whose gift is considered ‘better’. This story is, again from the 3rd Millennium BCE, while the bible is from the 6th Century BCE.

Thanks.

NothingSpecial99

Pro

Before I begin to refute my opponents claims, I will first present my own.

1.The complexity of organisms demand that there is a Creator
All organisms have DNA, a very complex molecule that is responsible for the production of all proteins that make up that organism. What is most intriguing about DNA is that it is a very sophisticated language system where the "words" have a completely different meaning than the nucleotides or "letters" much like how the meaning of words are different than the letters it is composed of. Evolution doesn"t provide any explanation on how such a coding system could evolve on its own, much less the mechanisms that take that code and make them into functional proteins. Have you ever seen a code or language not written by an intelligent mind?

2.Chinese characters point to Genesis
Chinese writing, one of the oldest languages to exist has some characters that refer to Genesis. Here is a link to the article: http://creation.com...
One of my favorites can be found a 5D with the character of large boat !337;z90;The left radical is !311; meaning vessel. The radical on top is 八 meaning eight and 口means people. This character is a reference to Noah"s Ark and Noah"s family of eight. Another character 婪meaning to desire composes of two trees on top 木 and the character 女meaning female. This is a reference to the Garden of Eden, the tree of life, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil and Eve"s temptation.
3. Evidence challenging Old Earth
Carbon-14 has been used to date dead animals, but Carbon-14 can only date things no older than 50,000 years old. However, C14 has been discovered in diamonds which are supposed to be billions of years old. Diamonds are one of the hardest materials known to man so contamination shouldn"t be a problem.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...
https://answersingenesis.org...
Dr Russell Humphreys and Dr John Baumgardner, leaders of the RATE project discovered that significant amounts of helium have been found in zircons. Helium, due to the size of its molecules shouldn"t exist in structures billions of years old.
http://creation.com...
Debate Round No. 2
64bithuman

Con

Thanks Pro.

So begins rebuttals.


1. The complexity of organisms demand that there is a Creator

You can’t back those points up empirically, because I could point out that you could say that about anything and never have to prove your side of the argument. For example, you could say that the universe is complex, and so a god must have made it, and I could say perhaps we should continue studying the universe in a scientific way, and then come to conclusions with evidence.

I’d say it’s the classic god of the gaps argument, but it isn’t even really that. We have answers to the DNA issue you brought up.

DNA may be complex, but to assume that its complexity could only be explained through by the existence of a god is a bit ignorant to the science, not to mention a bit baffling. DNA has been exceptionally useful in further proving evolution.

The human genome project, for example, recently found the sequence of the A, T, G and C building blocks of our three billion bases of DNA. Through the sequencing of our DNA, we found that the human race as a whole is 99.9% identical (and that we are 98% similar to chimps); that the .1% missing percent is what makes up the several million fluctuating bases that gives us unique traits.

It is not random chance. It’s natural selection. It’s For example, we see a similar kind of evolution in single cell organisms. If a single cell organism like euglena can evolve antennae for light, then surely the process of DNA evolving in organisms won’t be as shocking.

So, to answer your question: “Have you ever seen a code or language not written by an intelligent mind?”

Yes, I have. We’ve only begun the process of uncovering the code we naturally evolved on our journey from the simplest of organisms to the more complex beings we are now.


2. Chinese characters point to Genesis


I’m trying to figure out how referencing an ancient Chinese myth about a world-wide flood/the Garden of Eden proves that it scientifically/historically happened and can be proved. As I pointed out before, such stories ran rampant in many cultures. Examine the story more logically - try and picture this story happening in your own neighborhood:

A man who lived thousands of years ago builds a boat 150 feet longer than any wooden ship we can build today, (being that wood is a terrible material for shipbuilding, being that it warps and bends and breaks apart) and not only that, but then somehow collects two of every animal, loads them all into a boat in only seven days, feeds them, keeps them from murdering each other/escaping and then somehow rebuilds a devastated earth with only his family.

Here’s a neat table:

Log mass range (g)

0-1

1-2

2-3

3-4

4-5

5-6

6-7

7-8

Ave. mass (kg) (p. 13)

.005

.05

.5

5

50

316

3160

31600

# of mammals (p. 10)

466

1570

1378

1410

1462

892

246

7424

# of birds (p. 10)

630

2272

1172

450

70

4

4598

# of reptiles (p. 10)

642

844

688

492

396

286

270

106

3724

total # of animals

1738

4686

3238

2352

1928

1182

516

106

15746

Ave. yearling mass (kg) (p. 66)

.005

.05

.5

5

10

100

300

1000

Total mass after one year

8.7

234.3

1619

11760

19280

118200

154800

106000

411902

Total mass assuming adults

8.7

234.3

1619

11760

96400

373512

1630560

3349600

5463694

Additional clean birds

1575

5680

2930

1125

175

10

11495

Additional ruminants (138 genera)

260

420

10

690

Additional clean animal mass (yearling weight, kg)

8

284

1465

5625

4350

43000

3000

47600

The ark specified in the bible mathematically would not have been big enough to house the animal kingdom.

Better evidence (which I will provide) would be something like this: (https://iambilly.wordpress.com...)

s://iambilly.files.wordpress.com...; alt="grand33" />


This nifty illustration of the Grand Canyon leaves no room for a flood. Radiometric dating again places the Vishnu formation at around 1.7 Billion – 2 Billion years old. Each layer is packed with evidence for the time the layer was formed. Scientists can see advances and regressions in oceans and seas, swamp formations, erosion, deserts, fossils of dinosaurs, of ancient mammals, ancient fish, algae, lizards – you name it. Creationists sum up the Grand Canyon as the result of a flood. This is ludicrous. If there was a catastrophic flood, they would see it in the layers, and they don’t.

Oh, and by the way, the Chinese characters thing has been rebuked since it was introduced - http://rationalwiki.org...

The idea behind this setup is to suggest that the character refers to the eight people that were on the Ark: Noah, his wife, their three sons and their wives. However, CMI is making a crucial mistake in disassembling the character completely. What they ignore is the fact that Chinese characters are not made up exclusively of components that provide a meaning, but also of phonetic radicals that are supposed to offer a clue as to how they're pronounced. In both of the cases above, they simply skip this part in order to extract the meaning they want from it. The first character does not feature 八 and 口 as separate components, but rather as the combination 㕣 yǎn, with the (irrelevant) meaning of "marsh". Likewise, the second one features 公 g!3;ng, "public" as the additional component.

Another point which they ignore completely is that there are specific kanji/hanzi for an ark - 方!311; (fāngzh!3;u) in Chinese or the Japanese 箱!311; hakobune which translates roughly as "square-boat", or "box-boat".[4] Noah's Ark would be |94;|50;{98;箱!311; - Noa no Hakobune.”

3. Evidence challenging Old Earth

A classic argument. You’re right, carbon dating isn’t ideal. That’s why we use radiometric dating instead. I won’t waste time trying to argue that carbon dating is perfect, because scientists don’t use that method, and even when they do/did, another method is always used to verify. It’s basic science. Don’t expect one method to be perfect. Cross reference.

Which is why if I could refer you back to the handy table and the link to the full table you can see that they used radiometric dating and other methods and still came to the same conclusions.

http://eveloce.scienceblog.com...

NothingSpecial99

Pro

NothingSpecial99 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
64bithuman

Con

Opponent concedes.
NothingSpecial99

Pro

NothingSpecial99 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
64bithuman

Con

Opponent concedes, Part 2.
NothingSpecial99

Pro

NothingSpecial99 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by NothingSpecial99 2 years ago
NothingSpecial99
I do apologize but I'm going to have to forfeit this entire debate since I'm occupied with AP testing. If time opens up, I'll do my best
Posted by 64bithuman 2 years ago
64bithuman
Don't know why my picture didn't load, but it's in the link. Also, feel free to begin rebuttals of my rebuttals if you want to.
Posted by 64bithuman 2 years ago
64bithuman
No problem, I've been there before!
Posted by NothingSpecial99 2 years ago
NothingSpecial99
I do apologize for the rushed argument. I was sick for a while
Posted by NothingSpecial99 2 years ago
NothingSpecial99
I'm looking forward to this debate. Please respond if you are atleast working on an arguement
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
64bithumanNothingSpecial99Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture.
Vote Placed by creationtruth 2 years ago
creationtruth
64bithumanNothingSpecial99Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct point to Con for Pro's forfeiture. Pro failed to adequately address and rebut Con's fallacious arguments. While Pro's evidence against an ancient Earth are valid, his argument from complexity and Chinese characters are inconclusive. He should rather have argued for specified and irreducible complexity, and have dropped the Chinese characters argument, as well as have developed his evidence against an old Earth. While a few points in Pro's rebuttal are valid, most of Pro's arguments and rebuttals are erroneous. Both sides, in my view, failed in the "convincing argument" department.