The Instigator
jack999
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
tmhustler
Con (against)
Winning
2 Points

Evolution is True

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 1 vote the winner is...
tmhustler
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/4/2009 Category: Science
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,482 times Debate No: 9129
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (13)
Votes (1)

 

jack999

Pro

Evolution is true due to observable and undeniable facts.

First at the origin of life, If you run an electric current through methane, ammonia, hydrogen and water Amino acids the basic building blocks of life can form. All of those chemicals would have been present in the young earth, along with the electric current, simply because of where there is water there are clouds and where there are clouds there is thunder, which allows accounts for the electricity. More info here :http://www.accessexcellence.org...

We also have observed micro and macro evolution, as well as beneficial mutations, as examples are given in this video .

We can back this up using dating methods to verify ages of fossils linking humans to a common ancestor with monkeys.

Given this evidence and more, Evolution surly must be true.
tmhustler

Con

to start of I do think evolution is fact I took this debate as a challenge. so from here on out I will argue as a non believer in evolution

first the origin of life I am assuming you are talking about the miller-Urey experiment.
the main problem with there experiment was there was no oxygen included. why was there no oxygen because they knew it would destroy any amino acids that could form. this does not explain life's origins anyway because it does not show how these building blocks became living cells.

sorry by my speakers are broke so I couldn't hear the video.

can you give me an example of macro evolution or a completely beneficial mutation?

because your opening statement only dealt with abiogenesis they are the only thing that I can dispute so far
Debate Round No. 1
jack999

Pro

The instances of Macro evolution include species of mosquitoes in the genus Culex and Rhagoletis Pomonella (AKA the Apple Maggot). The beneficial mutation being the nucleotide insertion that gave rise to nylonace( i am sorry that i cannot get the correct spelling) a species of bacteria.

As for the lack of oxygen it was believed that Earth would have had a reduced atmosphere much like Jupiter and other planets currently have, Which would not have had any oxygen. While it does not explain how they became Cells, it does show that non-living things can be made into living materials. The Amino Acids can be explained to form cells slowly over time, it is not like we claim that it happened in a day, it took a billion years for this to occur, plenty of time for the acids to come in contact and form the first proteins and eventually cells. , hypothetical of course because as some one in the comments stated, no one was there.
tmhustler

Con

That was not a good instance of macro evolution first you gave no source for your information secondly how do you know that it was speciation and not them merely finding a new species of mosquitoes.

"the Amino Acids can be explained to form cells slowly over time, it is not like we claim that it happened in a day, it took a billion years for this to occur, plenty of time for the acids to come in contact and form the first proteins and eventually cells."

you in no way answered how amino acids can turn into cells. please give a scientific answer to this not just a hypothesis with a source.

the argument so far has been on abiogenoses because of this I would say I am winning this debate being as the burden of proof falls on you and you have brought up no evidence for evolution thus far
Debate Round No. 2
jack999

Pro

jack999 forfeited this round.
tmhustler

Con

my opponent has forfeited his round and has failed to prove evolution because of this I must claim victory in this debate
Debate Round No. 3
jack999

Pro

jack999 forfeited this round.
tmhustler

Con

my opponent has forfeited his round and has failed to prove evolution because of this I must claim victory in this debate
Debate Round No. 4
jack999

Pro

jack999 forfeited this round.
tmhustler

Con

my opponent has forfeited his round and has failed to prove evolution because of this I must claim victory in this debate
Debate Round No. 5
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
On the contrary, jack, evolution is a hot topic on this site; someone will always take the debate.
Posted by jack999 7 years ago
jack999
Oh i know its week, but you make it to strong no one joins XD
Posted by Xer 7 years ago
Xer
Yes.

But this is one of the weakest arguments in favor of evolution I've ever seen.

There is much better evidence and arguments that you have put forth.
Posted by jack999 7 years ago
jack999
Did you miss the link about half way through the first post?
Posted by Xer 7 years ago
Xer
"however the sources are legitimate"

Haha, you don't even have any sources. Well, besides the YouTube video.
Posted by jack999 7 years ago
jack999
Intentional XD
Posted by studentathletechristian8 7 years ago
studentathletechristian8
"however the sources are legitimate, though i know my spelling it terrible"

Rofl.... capitalize the I and *it* should be *is*. I noticed the irony haha.
Posted by jack999 7 years ago
jack999
Ha ha so hilarious XD

however the sources are legitimate, though i know my spelling it terrible.
Posted by Xer 7 years ago
Xer
Wonderful sources and great spelling. (Sarcasm.)
Posted by jack999 7 years ago
jack999
However it cannot be disproved by that fact because neither where you. Evolution does not depend of the sole concept of the origin of the universe, but also the mechanisms in which things currently change and adapt to their environment. Those portions are observable and we are here to see them.

However the creation of everything can follow that logic, that you where not there and there fore could not have been able to say it was created in another way, however this does have evidence of how things could have happened based on what would have likely been there unlike the BS of "god did it" and that's it, no evidence behind it, nothing.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tmhustler 7 years ago
tmhustler
jack999tmhustlerTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:02