The Instigator
kiwi.krab
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Commondebator
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Evolution (con) vs. creationism (pro)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 3 votes the winner is...
Commondebator
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/12/2015 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 648 times Debate No: 68239
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

kiwi.krab

Pro

For all you people out there who believe in evolution. I challenge you to debate me in this. So please tell me, how did the world start?
Commondebator

Con

I thank my opponent for creating this debate. I will keep first round as acceptance and request my opponent to present his/her case.

Keep in mind that evolution is a biological term used to describe the process of which species gradually change. It does not describe "how the world started".

If my opponent pleases, I may also add in my arguments for recent scientific theories that may oppose creationism. However, even though this is not what the question states, I am more than happy to do so.

So, assuming by my opponent's resolution I will provide evidence for current accepted scientific theories, and show how creationism is flawed with little to no evidence.

Good luck.

(I request my opponent to bring up definitions so no conflict arises)
Debate Round No. 1
kiwi.krab

Pro

I apologize if I was unclear. Evolution being the start of the world as to the "Big Bang". Creationism being one God responsible for the dart of the universe.
Commondebator

Con

R.1 Evidences towards the big bang
Accelerating expansion of the universe

The accelerating universe points out evidence towards a huge possibility of a singularity for the creation

of the universe. The evidences for the accelerating expansion include the red shift, and isotropic distribution of the objects in space. We can detect the expansion through redshift bytheir electromagnetic spectra to determine the distance and speed of remote objects in space. (1)


2. Cosmic microwave background radiation

In 1964 Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson serendipitously discovered the cosmic background radiation, an an omnidirectional signal in the microwave band. the radiation was found to be consistent with an almost perfect black body spectrum in all directions.This discovery showed radiations that were isotopic and further supported the big bang theory. (2)

3. Other evidences supporting the big bang include abundance of primordial elements, galactic evolution and distribution, and Primordial gas clouds. (2)


R.2 Evidences towards evolution

1. Ancient organism remains

Darwin found the bones of an extinct giant sloth, Megatherium. He realized that animals can become extinct and that life is not unchanging, and Darwin also saw many similarities between extinct and living animals. This provided evidence that the giant sloth, Megatherium was an ancestor of the tree sloth. This showed that the sloth evolved. (3)

2.Similarities among living organisms.

Many organisms share a similar body structure such as Horses', donkeys', and zebras'. This provide evidence that they shares a common ancestor until they branched off. This also includes for apes and humans, also showing similar DNA structure. (4)
Similarities among embryos

Fish embryos and human embryos both have gill slits. In fish they develop into gills, but in humans they disappear before birth. This shows that the animals are similar and that they develop similarly, implying that they are related, and they have common ancestors and that they started out the same, gradually evolving different traits. (5)



http://en.wikipedia.org......
http://en.wikipedia.org......

http://necsi.edu......

http://necsi.edu......

http://necsi.edu......
Debate Round No. 2
kiwi.krab

Pro

I have heard from others that they believe in the beginning there were some gases that causes the Big Bang. Where did these gases come from if there was nothing in the beginning.
Commondebator

Con

My opponent choses to drop all my arguments and yet go straight into the argument that many creationists make.

"Where did it come from"

Now, this debate is in regarding the evidences involved. However, to answer my opponent's question, it is possible for quantum fluctuations to exist before matter since "Energy cannot be created nor destroyed" .

I await for my opponent's argument
Debate Round No. 3
kiwi.krab

Pro

In the beginning there was nothing. You cannot make something out of nothing. Someone had to put it there. And yes you can create energy.
Commondebator

Con

In physics, as Lawrence Krauss puts it, nothing is not really nothing. It is many particles coming in and out of existence. The dominant energy in the universe resides in empty space.

In fact, quantum mechanics combined with relativity, can tell us that we did come from nothing.(1)

And as per the 1st law of thermodynamics, energy cannot be created nor destroyed. That is quite puzzling but true.

Other than that, my argument stands.

1.http://www.openculture.com...
Debate Round No. 4
kiwi.krab

Pro

Before the Big Bang occurred some people said there were gases that did something. Where did those gases come from? My opener says that there were always there. But unfortunately he/she was wrong. Gases and not the same thing as energy. Everything comes from something. (Even if it is a higher being) these gases could not of just appeared out of thin air. Nothing existed before God Almighty put it there.
Commondebator

Con

My opponent literally gives nothing for his/her stance. Instead, he/she wastes time on things that have already been proven. (Energy cannot be created nor destroyed)

He/she does not even read my arguments! Gases did not create the universe, and I never said that.

Using my opponent's logic, if everything comes from something, then god had to come from something too!

Thank you for this debate

Irrelevant but interesting thing to think about:

If god claims that nothing created him, doesn't that mean that god is an Atheist?
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by zero101 2 years ago
zero101
Then by the same token, the universe could imagine this: The universe has existed forever, it has no beginning or end, and it is everything.
Posted by kiwi.krab 2 years ago
kiwi.krab
It is hard for the mind to grasp this because we have a beginning but try to imagine this. God existed forever, he has no beginning or end. He created everything.
Posted by zero101 2 years ago
zero101
Pro,

I have a question:

If God exists, who put them there?

And if you claimed that God was there in the beginning, couldn't you claim the same about the universe?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 1Credo 2 years ago
1Credo
kiwi.krabCommondebatorTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con provided good reasons for thinking evolution is more probably true than creationism. Pro failed to provide comparably good reasons for thinking creationism is more likely true than evolution.
Vote Placed by Valar_Dohaeris 2 years ago
Valar_Dohaeris
kiwi.krabCommondebatorTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: obvious reasons .will clarify if pushed
Vote Placed by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
kiwi.krabCommondebatorTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: CVB. PRO pretty much drops the entirety of CON's case, I don't know how you could even vote for pro :/