Creationism/ID (pro) vs Evolution (con)
Debate Rounds (4)
1. Humans have many parts of their anatomy which do not serve any real purpose such as the tailbone or male nipples. It would be benificial to remove these components as the mother will be wasting nutrients to create them. These organs also poccess the problem that they will become infected. This happens often with wisdom teeth and tonsils thereby making these parts more trouble then they're worth. If evolution were true than these parts would quickly be removed as they do not benefit the species. If we were created by a fallible designer it is possible that they made a mistake or did not think it all the way through.
2. My next point is on the development of complex organs especially the sex organs. As you know the sex organs allow 2 organisms to reproduce and the offspring gains genetic traits from both of them. If evolution were true than this procces would take a very long time (as 2 sexes would have to arise from one or from a previous proccess of sharing genetic material). This procces would have to also offer an advantage over the method of asexual reproduction and the method of horizontal gene transfer which bacteria use to evolve today. These organs would also have the disadvantage of being infected and reducing the chance that the organism would survive. If it were a fallible creatormade us than it may have decided for whatever reason to give us sex organs.
For these reasons it makes more sense that a fallible creator/creators made us.
To construct his case that humans were created by falliable my opponent states two things, that humans have many parts of their anatomy which do not serve any real purposes and may cause problems and that sex organs are simply too complicated to be evolved. This is a non sequitur fallacy, just because of defects and complications of human anitomy does not neccessarily mean that we were designed by falliable beings for reasons unknown. My opponent has thus failed to come up with sufficient evidence for his BoP.
My case is that evolution has scientific evidence to support its validility as a scientific theory. Such examples include the fossil record, homologies, distrubution in time and space, and evidence by example. Due to time constaints I shall go into detail about each of those evidences for evolution.
In conclusing, my opponent's arguments do not provide sufficient evidence to believe that fallibale beings created all life on Earth for reasons unknown. There is, however, sufficient scientific evidence to believe that the theory of evolution is true which will be explored next round.
Another example I would like to add is the curious species, the bombardier beetle. The bombardier beetle will (when in danger) release two chemicals from its abdomen which when mixed will produce an explosive reaction which the beetle will use to defend itself. With evolution it would be very difficult for a species to select for all these traits. The beetle would need to produce both chemicals and aquire traits to protect itself from the boiling hot reactants coming out of its abdomen. This further refutes evolution as it would be far more likely that the bombardier beetle was created by an intelligent being(s).
The Fossil Record shows organisms similiar to those today but slightly different. Combined, the fossil record shows a change over time, which is evidence for evolution. (http://necsi.edu...)
Evolutionary theory states that all life developed from one common ancestor and homologies, or similiraties to in living organisms is evidence for this. http://evolution.berkeley.edu...
Living things share DNA, such as humans and bananas share 50% of their dna and humans and chimpanzees share about 99% DNA. This also supports the evolutionary theory that all life comes from a common ancestor. (http://news.sciencemag.org...
Though the fossil record does support evolution it does not disprove the fallible beings I am arguing for. The fossils could have been animals that the fallible being created but died due to unknown complications.
The homologous structures support my claim as it shows that the fallible beings simply modified each animal as they went. It would not make any sense for them to build each animal from scratch when they can simply modify each being.
DNA fits along the same lines a homologous structures, the beings which created us simply modified our DNA as they went.
My first new argument discusses human sexuality. As you know there is a large spectrum of human sexuality. In the wild homosexuality offers an advantage because it allows social organisms to create bonds within the group. This is of course a very advantageous trait for social species. Therefore it makes sense that all organisms within social species should be bisexual as then the organisms could form bonds with each member of its social group. This is not the case in reality as some organisms are only attracted to members of the opposite sex and others to the same sex. If evolution were true than bisexual individuals would form the most bonds within their group and increase their chances of passing on their genes.
The homologous does not prove fallible beings as well, but it does give significant evidence for evolution
The same goes with DNA.
All these things combined do not prove the existance of fallible beings but rather all suports evolution. With all these evidences combined we have a valid scientific theory of evolution.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.