The Instigator
qopel
Pro (for)
Losing
45 Points
The Contender
creationist1
Con (against)
Winning
49 Points

Evolution is a fact

Do you like this debate?NoYes-9
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 19 votes the winner is...
creationist1
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/20/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,983 times Debate No: 32711
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (180)
Votes (19)

 

qopel

Pro

No adding new arguments in later rounds No word games. No playing with semantics. No vague definition of words. If you use a word that can have several meanings, make it clear what you actually mean.
creationist1

Con

Some creation scientists discovered three things that suggest that Dino's are still living. First, they found major evidence in the Congo. Leaves stripped from trees up high, foot prints, and they even found its lair. They recorded its breathing, and the local tribes have tons of legends of this beast. Second, some researchers found a baby sea dwelling Dino in a whale belly. Third, there have been sightings of flying "lizard looking things." Cars at night have also seen what look like headlights above them. Some species of Dino are known to have reflective eyes like a cat. Two more things. 1:How do animals evolve if DNA prevents it? 2:How do you explain the grand canyon?
Debate Round No. 1
qopel

Pro

I'd like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate, and the rules.

I'd like to point out that there is no such thing as a "creation scientist" because creationism isn't a science. None of these so called "scientists" have ever had a peer reviewed paper published in a scientific journal.

My opponent is making claims without evidence. Please provide proof that what these "scientists" are claiming is true.

Please, also provide documentation for any "sightings" you claim to have happened.

As far as the questions go:
1. DNA does not prevent evolution. DNA mutation is actually needed for evolution to happen.
http://evolution.berkeley.edu...

2. The Grand canyon has nothing to do with evolution.
But if you want it explained, here's the link:
http://www.bobspixels.com...
creationist1

Con

okay, I didn't quite understand how these debates work. okay, first there is such thing as a creation scientist. they follow the scientific method, and they make what they find known by the public. unfortunately, evolutionists do not. every time they find something against evolution, they cover it up. read the evolution handbook, chapter 1. now to prove your case, you need to give some evidence that I can't disprove. go ahead.
Debate Round No. 2
qopel

Pro

According to Wikipedia: "The overwhelming consensus of the scientific community is that creation science is a religious, not a scientific view, and that creation science does not qualify as science because it lacks empirical support, supplies no tentative hypotheses, and resolves to describe natural history in terms of scientifically untestable supernatural causes"
http://en.wikipedia.org...

That's proof that creation scientists do not follow the scientific method and creation science is not a science.
/wiki/Evolution_as_fact_and_theory

The claims of any cover ups by my opponent has not been substantiated.

I want to thank my opponent foe this debate. I wish he could have given me real evidence as opposed to just assertions. Although my opponent may believe what he is saying is true, that doesn't make it true.

Evolution is a fact
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Evolution is not "just a theory"
http://www.notjustatheory.com...

My opponent wants evidence that he can't disprove:
Here are the facts about evolution:

http://howgoodisthat.wordpress.com...

1. Beyond a shadow of doubt, human DNA and chimpanzee DNA are 98% identical.
2. The genetic evidence of natural selection is compelling enough proof of evolution without any evidence from fossils whatsoever.
3. Not a single living organism that has ever been discovered shows any sign, whatsoever, of having evolved by non-Darwinian means.

Go ahead. Disprove that.
creationist1

Con

first, I'm going to say that I'm not going to even look at the wikipedia pages. anyone came write on there, preventing it from being reliable. let's debate again, and I'll try to get the hang of giving links that are reliable. before I disprove what you said I'm going to give a few links that are very hard on evolution. Dino's still exist. here are some links.
http://www.allaboutcreation.org...

http://www.skygaze.com...

http://creation.com...

http://www.discoverynews.us...

http://s8int.com...

http://www.salem-news.com...

http://ghostradio.wordpress.com...

i think that is enough. but if anyone wants more, Google has a ton more. I stopped reading the 3rd link you gave when I found it to be inacurat. now, this may be slightly off, but according to the apologia general science book, you can go farther than a theory.
step by step as you put it down.

1- it doesn't matter how close our DNA is to a chimp. God obviously used a master plan to create the universe. anything alive has DNA. all things alive can since and respond to change, and so on through the criteria for life. thing have order and ritham. if you look half way like a monkey your DNA may have a reasonable. (although I have never quite thought my face looks like a monkey :) we both have 4 legs and hands and look humanoid.)
2-even Darwin gave up natural selection after studding it all his life. it e. DNA can't make new plans for say, lungs, unless it already has the plans in it's DNA.
3-so? I'm saying that they didn't evolve at all.

I think that you haven't given enough evidence to say that evolution is a fact. the Dino links I gave are evidence that it isn't fact, so....
any way, it was fun.
Debate Round No. 3
180 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by johnlubba 3 years ago
johnlubba
Wow this debate had seven dislikes..... The first I have seen with that many dislikes...Way to go.
Posted by johnlubba 3 years ago
johnlubba
Wow this debate had seven dislikes..... The first I have seen with that many dislikes...Way to go.
Posted by CaptJack92a 3 years ago
CaptJack92a
So far a few remarks in the debate demanding for "evidence" where as the links provided by the party in question have yet to be either peer reviewed themselves, or non-biased opinions.

I think both parties should be able to give reliable/peer-reviewed/un-biased resources and citations. Just a thought I found worth pointing out.

There is also a lot of slander in the comments coming from the pro side of the debate. That alone is a decrease in credibility.

The con argument has my interest so far, but has very few resources. Two or three total I have found may be considered for interest as they are either non-biased or peer-reviewed.
Posted by creationist1 3 years ago
creationist1
he did! his account is closed!
Posted by creationist1 3 years ago
creationist1
holy moly, you get really mad. both of you. are you really quiting qopel? i wanted another go.
Posted by Solomon_Grim 3 years ago
Solomon_Grim
Well... That escalated quickly.
Posted by qopel 3 years ago
qopel
I'm done debating here anyway....just so I can get vote bombed again? Fuk You all.
Posted by qopel 3 years ago
qopel
I wouldn't waste a second debating with you. You're not worth my time.
Posted by Smithereens 3 years ago
Smithereens
well, before you go, lets have a debate on evolution. challenge me.
Posted by Subutai 3 years ago
Subutai
Well I've had enough of your sh!t. Live in your own little world, qopel.
19 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Thaddeus 3 years ago
Thaddeus
qopelcreationist1Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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: Both lacked an argument til r3. Both arguments were very very weak. Creationist just edges out qopel, in light of the fact that this debate should have been very easy for qopel to win, yet still failed to make cogent argument. Furthermore, an assumption of the BoP clearly lies on qopel, due to the strongly asserted resolution. Addendum - quopel sent a rude pm to me requesting I change my vote. Poor conduct.
Vote Placed by Smithereens 3 years ago
Smithereens
qopelcreationist1Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: well, con narrowly won sources 6-7.
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 3 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
qopelcreationist1Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I am surprised to see actual votes on this debate. There was no real debate. Neither side argued to affirm or negate the resolution. Both were equally bad. I don't see any one person as having a BOP since it wasn't specified in the OP. Pro could have won easily by citing the simplest reasons pointing to evolution even if he didn't go into great detail. The fossil record alone is evidence although other more compelling evidence exists as well.
Vote Placed by LibertarianWithAVoice 3 years ago
LibertarianWithAVoice
qopelcreationist1Tied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Grammar: Con had a few misused words, " anyone came write on there", and often forgot to capitalize. Reasons for conduct and argument points go hand and hand. Con focused more on making vague, unrelated arguments, and never showing how they connected. I agree in a BOP for con, but only if Con makes sensible coherent arguments. Sources: While Pro used less sources, Con never connected dinosaurs to debate ( in the debate ) so his/her dinosaur sightings are the equivalent of putting my little pony pictures.
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
lannan13
qopelcreationist1Tied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: counter vote bombing on rottingroom.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
qopelcreationist1Tied
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: Pro should have won this debate with ease. Cite the scientific literature, textbbooks, and some quotes from real scientists. Failing to make the case is inexcusable, even though the resolution is clearly true. Pro prohibited 3rd round arguments when he finally made the case, though rather weakly. Con's arguments were silly and irrelevant, but Pro had to meet the burden of proof.
Vote Placed by airmax1227 3 years ago
airmax1227
qopelcreationist1Tied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering CP... (An intentional votebomb intended to antagonize another member is poor conduct, both in voting practice and general site conduct. Consequently CP's voting privileges have been temporarily removed)
Vote Placed by Pennington 3 years ago
Pennington
qopelcreationist1Tied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Reasons for voting decision: I retract my VB. I will vote. S/G Pro because Con made many mistakes. I give conduct to Con because Pro broke his own rules by posting new arguments in the last round and he did not supply enough to fill the BOP, therefore arguments to Con. Con also put just a little doubt on Pros claims which took away from the BOP Pro did give. Both had sources.
Vote Placed by ConservativePolitico 3 years ago
ConservativePolitico
qopelcreationist1Tied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Come at me Pro-Bro.
Vote Placed by Enji 3 years ago
Enji
qopelcreationist1Tied
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: Pro had the burden of proof to show that evolution was a fact. Con's arguments were worse. Conduct to Con for Pro's bashing of voters in the comments section (and apparently PM)