Evolution (Con) vs. Creationism (Pro)
Debate Rounds (5)
Now that I have the time to do this debate I'll reinstate it. Notice that this debate is impossible to accept and if you find a way to accept then you forfeit. Comment below if you are interested.
Arguments must be kept biological. If not, then the side must justify using the argument by explaining why it is relevant to the resolution.
Creationism - the doctrine that matter and all things were created, substantially as they now exist, by an omnipotent Creator, and not gradually evolved or developed.
Round 1: Acceptance + Definitions
Round 2: Arguments
Round 3-5: Rebuttals
Evolution - the scientific observation of longterm and short term adaptations through diversification.
Abiogenesis - the scientific theory that the first protean or proteans evolved in the right conditions from non-living things.
Theory - something that can be tested, observed and is observable and is higher than scientific law.
Microevolution - varieties in a different type that evolve major adaptations over a shorter period of time.
Macroevolution - major evolutions over a long period of time.
(I apologize but I don't know to to insert images in a debate. Sources 1, 2 and 9 will take you to the images I tried to use.)
Let me begin by first introducing the two models. If Con has problems with the way I introduce the evolution model, he/she may correct me when he/she post his/her argument without penalty.
First off is the evolutionary tree of life:
Evolution claims that all species stem from a single-celled organism .
On the other hand, we have the creation orchard.
Which states that all species stem from the original kinds created during God’s seven days of creation. We creationists define kinds as a term that is a larger grouping than species. The origin of kinds comes from Genesis 1:11-12 “And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds” and further more in Genesis 1:21 and 1:24-25. For example, dogs would be defined as a biblical kind.  
It might seem “out there” that all species stemmed from these created kinds, however, species can arise rather quickly. For example, most dog breeds have arisen in the last couple of centuries. 
I believe my opponent and I can agree that natural selection occurs and can create new species. Both in the evolution and the creation model, natural selection plays a huge part. We will probably disagree however, how much change natural selection can create. Natural selection cannot create species outside a created kind.
The underlying problem is the issue of genetic information. For evolution to work, new genetic information must be introduced to the population. Natural selection is a destructive process that selects the traits that are best suited for environment. Whereas the traits not suited for the environment get eliminated, therefore information is lost.
Evolutionists have looked to mutations to fix this problem, but the problem is that mutations do not create new information in the genome. Mutations or copying mistakes of DNA destroy functional genes not creating them. For example, a mutation in the p53 gene disables the production of a protein responsible for regulation cell growth. And when cells uncontrollably grow and reproduce, you get cancer . Even beneficial mutations such as lactose intolerance are due to the destruction of functional genes. Lactose intolerance is caused when there is a mutation in the LCT gene that is responsible for producing the lactase enzyme which breaks down lactose . Therefore mutations and natural selection do not produce the type of change necessary for evolution. In fact, since all mutations degrade information in the genome, this implies a very recent origin of species instead of evolution’s billions of years. To refute my claim is simple; provide an example where a mutation has increased the amount of information in the genome.
Another issue with the evolutionary model is living fossils. For example, the horseshoe crab which still exists today remains completely identical to the fossils 445 million years old . The fact that such organisms don’t change in these huge timescales proves a problem for evolution. Dr. Stephan Jay Gould, a Harvard paleontologist and an evolutionists recognizes this as a problem when he wrote, “the maintenance of stability within species must be considered as a major evolutionary problem.”  The fact that modern creatures have coexisted with “ancient” species affirms the creation account that all kinds of animals were created at the same time which brings me to my next point.
Because the creation model claims that all “kinds” have coexisted together, it is often ridiculed because it was thought of as preposterous that ancient creatures such as dinosaurs coexisted with humans. However, a strong case can be built that the two coexist together. I’ll be mainly talking about dinosaurs since they are a popular example to ridicule creationists.
Archeological evidence exists implies that ancient civilizations knew about dinosaurs long before the term was coined. As I’ll be taking an archeological argument, I must relate it to the resolution. The creation model claims that all “kinds” were made at the same time and that all species stem from these animals. Archeological evidence is like a fossil record that can affirm that both humans and dinosaurs were created at the same time.
For example, Incan burial stones contain what appear to be dinosaurs. For example, the one below depicts a Triceratops
And this one appears to be a Stegosaurus.
Another piece of evidence that humans and dinosaurs coexisted lies in soft tissue found in dinosaur bones . The tissue that was found was still able to stretch and retain its shape. However, the structures found like blood vessels, muscle, and skin decay rapidly to decomposers. In addition, proteins have been found in dinosaur bones such as collagen, hemoglobin, and osteocalcin . A report by The Biochemist states that proteins such as these even under the perfect conditions at 0 degrees Celsius the proteins would not last three million years . However, it is believed that dinosaurs lived in warm moist environments that would quickly degrade such proteins.
While we are on the topic of fossils, they also prove another problem for evolution. Darwin has predicted that we would find numerous transitional forms that transcend the biblical kinds. However, in the millions of fossils uncovered since then, there is rather a lack of transitional forms. Evolution claims that many modern species today can be linked to a common ancestor that would link the two together (ex. Amphibians and tetrapods), however what we have are a few, disputed examples of transitional fossils.
 The Holy Bible
Demonoid forfeited this round.
Demonoid forfeited this round.
Arguments still extended
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||6||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
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.