The Instigator
Cooldudebro
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
JasperFrancisShickadance
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Evolution (Pro) VS. Literal Creationism (Con) (Part III)

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...
JasperFrancisShickadance
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/8/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 733 times Debate No: 62944
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (2)

 

Cooldudebro

Pro

DON'T accept this if you want me to hold back.

BoP is shared.

First round is for acceptance.

Good luck!
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

I'm going all out too. :) Ready or not, here I come!! And good luck to you too, Pro.

Here is the link to Part ll. http://www.debate.org...

I stand for Creationism. To all voters who do not know, both of us debaters are Christians.

LET THE DEBATING BEGIN!
Debate Round No. 1
Cooldudebro

Pro

Hello! Thank you for accepting. I will not be holding back now. Good luck!


Fossil Record:

The fossil record is one of many things proving evolution. The fossils prove a slow, gradual change (1). As quoted from the article:


"Organisms have changed significantly over time. In rocks more than 1 billion years old, only fossils of single-celled organisms are found. Moving to rocks that are about 550 million years old, fossils of simple, multicellular animals can be found. At 500 million years ago, ancient fish without jawbones surface; and at 400 million years ago, fish with jaws are found. Gradually, new animals appear: amphibians at 350 million years ago, reptiles at 300 million years ago, mammals at 230 million years ago, and birds at 150 million years ago.1 As the rocks become more and more recent, the fossils look increasingly like the animals we observe today."

In 2004, scientist found fossils of what's the missing link between amphibians and fish. (2) Four different transitional species were found. This is a huge find, as now we confirm that fish turned into amphibian.


"
Fossils provide solid evidence that organisms from the past are not the same as those found today; they show a progression of evolution. Scientists calculate the age of fossils and categorize them to determine when the organisms lived relative to each other. The resulting fossil record tells the story of the past and shows the evolution of form over millions of years. For example, scientists have recovered highly-detailed records showing the evolution of humans and horses . The whale flipper shares a similarmorphology to appendages of birds and mammals, indicating that these species share a common ancestor . Over time, evolution led to changes in the shapes and sizes of these bones in different species, but they have maintained the same overall layout. Scientists call these synonymous parts homologous structures"

End quote (3).


Whale Evolution:

We have the full whale evolution timeline. As shown here:






As you can see, the whale's ancestors were land animals, but eventually lost their legs and went to the sea. The is undeniable proof of evolution.


I would like to have another part of my arguments in the next round. I have a friend coming, and barely got to this debate in time. Thanks!








1. http://biologos.org...
2. http://www.pbs.org...
3. https://www.boundless.com...
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

Introduction

Alright. To start I would like to ask you some questions.

You believe God is the Creator. Why would you believe that, but you don't believe Creationism? Give me a logical answer, and yes, this has everything to do with Christianity.

Second thing, do you believe God created us in His image? If you do, than why did he have us evolve as if we aren't the most special creature on the planet, and if you don't believe that then why do you think God created anything at all? It is written that God created all things but humans were to keep Him company. So if that wasn't the intention--and this is just something I want you to ponder--whaat was the purpose for God creating anything?!

Arguments

On to the concrete facts. I'd first like to share that one of the most recent of thousands of discoveries of proof of the authenticity of the history of the Bible is a Babylonian clay tablet dated 595 BC concerning Nebuchadnezzar's Chief Eunuch, Nebo-Sarsekim who was sent to King Zedekiah. This same Nebo-Sarsekim is mentioned in Jeremiah 39:3 in the date given in the Bible (See Archaeology, Vol.61, No. 1, January/February 2008, p. 24 http://www.archaeology.org...).

In creation vs. evolution the greatest unbelievable and yet most believed concept that evolutionists base their entire "science technology" on is that natural selection is proof of change in species. In credibility of creation vs. evolution, natural selection is the adaptation of a species to changes in the environment. These can be changes in size, shape or colour of any parts of the plant or animal, but it never has and never will change one species into another species. Evolutionists claim the change in species comes from mutations. Somewhere around millions of laboratory mutations by evolutionists have failed to produce a single change of species. These mutations have only produced freaks like extra legs or missing legs or organs. The offspring of these freaks either vanish or return back to the original species. All plants and animals reproduce after their own kind, as the Bible says in Genesis 1:11-25; 6:20; 7:14; Leviticus 11:14-29; 19:19; and Deuteronomy 14:13-18. In creation vs. evolution the credibility of creation is vastly more scientific than the incredibility of evolution.

Here are some logical reasons evolution is false:
Spontaneous punctuated equilibrium is not credible, cannot be tested, observed or measured. The theory of relativity is not credible, cannot be tested, observed or measured. Antimatter as a result of black holes is not credible, cannot be tested, observed or measured. Photons are not credible, cannot be tested, observed or measured. Time dilation is not credible, cannot be tested, observed or measured. The distance between galaxies at the limits of the universe is the same as they are everywhere. Therefore, the universe may not be expanding.
How many billions of years it would take a plant to develop seeds by accident in order to reproduce and how many billions of years it would take those plants to surround those seeds with delicious and nutritious fruit or vegetable matter by accident to incite animals to eat the seeds and spread them on the earth. At the same time, why were these fruits and vegetables absolutely essential for the lives of the animals? Was that also an accident?
Here are logical reasons that creationism is true:
The Creation of the earth environment was the same or better than today's environment. Gravity is not an accident. Earth and moon dust prove the earth is young. That water preserved itself for thousands of years is the result of natural water pollution and is not an accident. Euphrates River began about 6000 years ago. Niagra Falls dates back to the time of the Flood of Noah. The history of the Bible has been proven by thousands of archaeological discoveries. The coming to earth of Jesus actually occurred. Biblical Predictions of the coming of Jesus Christ prove that it was pre-planned. Skin color is not an accident. The organs and anatomy of humans and animals are not accidents. Symbiotic relationships prove that all species had to be created at the same time, or no species would survive. Cell division into different components of plants and animals is not an accident. Acid rain was pre-planned and has purpose. Climate of the earth is not an accident. Rapid decay of radioactive isotopes at the time of the flood and the time of creation proves that the earth is young. The pyramids prove that man's intelligence has not evolved, but has decreased. The Ten Commandments are valid guidelines for conduct.

Rebuttals

"The fossil record is one of many things proving evolution." The fossil record is definitely also one of the many things disproving evolution. See the arguments.

"The fossils prove a slow, gradual change." Maybe you're right, but how is this a good thing? It just reminds me of all the missing links that are covered up with faith-filled assumptions that evolutionists create. See arguments.

"In 2004, scientist found fossils of what's the missing link between amphibians and fish. Four different transitional species were found. This is a huge find, as now we confirm that fish turned into amphibian." OK, so you found a link. Finally! Because there should probably be more than that if you want to prove evolution!! But there are many problems with your claim, too. Evolutionists claim that the paddles of the crossopterygians evolved into legs. They claim that the rhipidistians evolved into the first amphibians, animals capable of living on land and in water. Toads and frogs are both amphibians. the rhipidistians and the coelacanth lived at the same time. They both are said to have become extinct millions of years ago. The rhipidistians are said to have evolved into amphibians, and the coelacanth just simply died out. Except that the coelacanth was found alive and unchanged less than a hundred years ago. Here's what J. R. Norman of the Department of Zoology, British Museum of Natural History, said: "The geological record has so far provided no evidence as to the origin of fishes." [1] If there was an evolutionary progression, then fish would have to be millions of years older than amphibians, and consequently in much lower rock strata (this argument is meaningless though, if as Creationists believe many of these layers of rock were laid down during the flood. There would be no real progression from one strata to the next).

Why whale evolution is wrong: Argentine paleontologist Marcelo Reguero, who led a joint Argentine-Swedish team, said the fossilized archaeocete jawbone found in February dates back 49 million years. In evolutionary terms, that’s not far off from the fossils of even older proto-whales from 53 million years ago that have been found in South Asia and other warmer latitudes. The evolution of the whale has previously raised substantial problems because of the extremely abrupt timescale over which it occurred. Explain that to me.

Thank you for your time! I look forward to the next round.
Debate Round No. 2
Cooldudebro

Pro

Cooldudebro forfeited this round.
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

Sadly, all arguments are extended.
Debate Round No. 3
Cooldudebro

Pro

Cooldudebro forfeited this round.
JasperFrancisShickadance

Con

I believe that CDB forfeited intentionally. It is an assumption, but he continued doing a different debate with me at the same time and decided not to do this one.

Conclusion: I have not been refuted well at all, perhaps due his ignorance and avoiding of arguments. My arguments withstood the test of CoolDudeBro, therefore had the best arguments!

Thank you for reading.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Cooldudebro 2 years ago
Cooldudebro
I'm sorry. I have had homework, relationship problems, and I was sick with a sinus infection. Please end in a tie.
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
JasperFrancisShickadance
Because, that's what ANTI THEISTS think after all.
Posted by Anti_Theist1 2 years ago
Anti_Theist1
This isn't a debate for crying out loud. It's fact vs. fiction.
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
JasperFrancisShickadance
50 minutes until CDB forfeits. Can he do it? x0
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
JasperFrancisShickadance
Umm what do you mean create life...?
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Just responding to your debate. And if you really want to make headlines, create life. Because you never will, you have lost the debate, or should.
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
JasperFrancisShickadance
*sorry, not the validity of the Bible but the reasons evolution/creationism is true.
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
JasperFrancisShickadance
Cheyennebodie, read at least the first round of the debate before assuming, because we are not arguing God we are arguing the validity of the Bible.
Posted by Cooldudebro 2 years ago
Cooldudebro
Why thank you. However, I do believe in a higher power.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
All you have to do to put this God thing to rest once and for all. Create life from non-living material. That would just about shut up all those God people.We will wait for you to accomplish what people have been trying to do for 100's or years. Prove there is no God.A person of your intellect, this should be a simple thing to do.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Truth_seeker 2 years ago
Truth_seeker
CooldudebroJasperFrancisShickadanceTied
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:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Could have been good, but because of the forfeit, Con wins.
Vote Placed by dynamicduodebaters 2 years ago
dynamicduodebaters
CooldudebroJasperFrancisShickadanceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: ff