READ: This debate will be a bit different. Lots of people who do this debate type a ton of words. How boring. This debate is going to be different. We are going to debate using 20 words max per each round (Excluding this paragraph). This isn't a particularly serious debate, so I guess the only strict rule is the 20 word max for each argument. Put your argument in quotes if you want to say something else, anything not in quotes cannot be voted on.
"Genetics, Paleontology, Zoology and Geology all confirm evolution is correct. It complies with religion if need be for religious people.
"Then you lack some basic ideas about scientific terminology. A theory is never considered a fact in science". The molecular orbital theory explains numerous chemical properties but it's not a fact....it's still a hypothesis
Reasons for voting decision: Pro definitely had better sources that actually linked to pages and con just linked to search engine results. I liked the semantic debate by both sides, so let's get to it. Con said facts need to be universal but never backed this up with a definition or a premise, while pro defined fact as abtheory backed up by experimentation or evidence. Pro actually provides the evidence in round one by mentioning zoology, paleontology and genetics. Con's semantic argument fails and does not mention any evidence until the last round and even then nothing specific was mentioned, like pro did.
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.