Evolution is a lie.
Debate Rounds (3)
My opponent's entire argument consists of two points, which I will now refute.
1. My opponent claims that evolution is a lie because it was never heard of until Darwin. There are significant problems with this argument.
People had never heard of Harry Potter until J.K Rowling wrote the books. Does that make the books a lie?
People had never heard of President Obama until he was born. Does that make him a lie?
One of the primary purposes of science is to examine the unknown. To claim that anything resulting from that process is a lie undermines the entire purpose of making the unknown known.
2. My opponent claims that evolution is a lie because Darwin was at one point a creationist. Now, there is evidence that Darwin was a creationist and even used God as the explanation for evolution in his Origin of Species . I will return to this point later in my argument. The main refutation needed here is that nobody is perfect. My opponent's argument that attacking creationists is the same as attacking Darwin is equivalent to attacking vegetarians because Hitler was a vegetarian . This is not an invocation of Godwin's law - it is an accurate comparison because I am not comparing Hitler/Nazis so much as their criticisms. Just because people believe or believed one thing does not mean all their beliefs are negated, especially when they naturally change through research and education. Additionally, Darwin went out and studied. His own experiments changed his beliefs.
Now I will begin with my own arguments.
Contention 1: Evolutionism and the idea of God are compatible.
Evolution does not inherently disprove the concept of God. God is an abstract concept; evolution is a well-supported theory. There are many theists (such as myself) who still believe in evolution . But this is not a debate about the existence of God.
Contention 2: Evolution is a well-supported scientific theory.
Science has produced a staggering amount of evidence in support of evolution.
A: Radiocarbon dating allows archaeologists to chronologically categorise fossils and the like based on isotopes .
B: Fossils serve as concrete evidence of our ancestors, as well as other organisms in the past, and we can see how we've changed since then . Consider the linked example completing a Neanderthal genome or Lucy , the iconic example of an early hominid.
C: Genetics allows scientists to study the uniqueness of each individual through DNA. DNA is essential to the study of evolution, as it demonstrates the differences and similarities between species. Consider the close relations between humans and chimpanzees, bonobos, and other primates .
I will save my other arguments for round 2. In the meantime, I look forward to my opponent's responses!
Whiteevan12 forfeited this round.
Contention 3: Microevolution has been demonstrated to exist.
My opponent's resolution (and arguments) does not specify between micro and macroevolution. As both are forms of evolution, and the resolution calls evolution a lie, if I prove the existence of microevolution, I disprove the resolution.
Microevolution refers to variations within a given type/species. John Morris lists natural selection as one example of microevolution, whereby undesired traits in a given species are weeded out . Dog breeding is another example of microevolution.
I also wish to refine my refutation to my opponent's first argument. People have taken issue with my examples because Harry Potter is still a fictional character. I was arguing against the reasoning behind my opponent's argument - that things that were not known at the beginning (where this is, I do not know) are lies. I do not believe this is a straw man fallacy, but in the event it is, I shall provide another example.
We did not know about gravity (we knew we stuck to the ground but not why or the principles behind it) until it was studied, but that does not make gravity a lie.
I hope my opponent returns for the third round!
Whiteevan12 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Enji 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.