The Instigator
SomeoneToHate
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mikal
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Evolution: False without involving Creationsim

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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...
Mikal
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/28/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 693 times Debate No: 36103
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

SomeoneToHate

Pro

Evolution is a joke.
It relies on fossils that don't exist, is based mostly on assumptions, and confuses adaptation for evolution.
For now, we'll stick with these facts and see where we go.
Mikal

Con

I accept.

Since Pro has been so kind to state evolution is false. He has accepted the BOP. I await his argument.
Debate Round No. 1
SomeoneToHate

Pro

It is said that macroevolution has been proven by a study that took lizards and put them all in different areas.
But many of these changes just seem to show mutation and adaptation.
Why do evolutionists insist on small changes of adaptation to be Evolution?
Mikal

Con

My opponent claims that evolution is false, and also says that he will not bring up creationism as an alternative(refreshing). So let us take a look at what the theory is itself.

The theory in short states

This is a basic overview so that my opponent will understand what he is claiming

*A species is a population of organisms that interbreeds and has fertile offspring.
*Living organisms have descended with modifications from species that lived before them.
*Natural selsms are produced than can survive because of limited resources.
*Organisms stection explains how this evolution has happened:
*More organiruggle for the necessities of life; there is competition for resources.
*Individuals within a population vary in their traits; some of these traits are heritable -- passed on to offspring.
*Some variants are better adapted to survive and reproduce under local conditions than others.
*Better-adapted individuals (the "fit enough") are more likely to survive and reproduce, thereby passing on copies of their genes to the next generation.
*Species whose individuals are best adapted survive; others become extinct.


So I believe my adversary has the term in which we are debating confused. We are debating "is evolution true". Simply stating it is adaption does not prove that it is inaccurate, but in fact you are acknowledging that it is true. You perhaps should have worded the debate to show that you do not like the term evolution. Actually the theory of evolution encompasses what it means to adapt and survive. It says that orgasms can evolve by "chance"(I will address the word chance below) in order to adapt to their environment. For example, consider the process of natural selection and what it entails, which results in adaptations presenting certain features of organisms that appear to suit the environment in which the organisms live ( An example would be the fit between a flower and its pollinator, the coordinated response of the immune system to certain types of pathogens, and the ability of bats to echo-locate). Such amazing adaptations clearly did not come about "by chance." They evolved via a combination of random and non-random processes. The process of mutation, which generates genetic variation, is random, but selection is non-random. My adversary claims it is mere adaption but it is much more than to simply tag that word on it.

In closing he has claimed that evolution is false in itself, and just stated it was adaption. The theory itself embraces adaption as one of its primary vocal points, so my opponent has not show how this theory is false. Thank you



http://evolution.berkeley.edu...
http://www.spaceandmotion.com...
http://evolution.berkeley.edu...
http://www.richarddawkins.net...
Debate Round No. 2
SomeoneToHate

Pro

SomeoneToHate forfeited this round.
Mikal

Con

extend argument due to FF
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Sagey 3 years ago
Sagey
I like the Blunt introduction, born out of sheer naive Ignorance: "Evolution is a Joke"

Funny how Evolution is such a massive, complete Theory that there is nothing else in existence that even comes close to replacing it.
It explains every Biological Fact, ever discovered nicely.
No other Theory comes close to explaining as many facts as Evolution does.
Posted by Shadowguynick 3 years ago
Shadowguynick
Orgasms can evolve. Nice wording Mikal
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by LevelWithMe 3 years ago
LevelWithMe
SomeoneToHateMikalTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited. Pro never made the case of Creationist Evolution. Pro made assertions and rhetorical remarks without backing them up. Con's arguments were organized and provided reliable sources for his information.
Vote Placed by wiploc 3 years ago
wiploc
SomeoneToHateMikalTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Forfeit. Persuasion: Pro didn't respond to Con's arguments.