The Instigator
vorxxox
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
rougeagent21
Con (against)
Winning
35 Points

Evolution is realistic

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 6 votes the winner is...
rougeagent21
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/21/2009 Category: Science
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 919 times Debate No: 7031
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (8)
Votes (6)

 

vorxxox

Pro

Um, I affirm the resolution. Good luck.
rougeagent21

Con

Well, seeing as how my opponent is affirmative, I will allow him to open. Why is evolution realistic?
Debate Round No. 1
vorxxox

Pro

Now, let me introduce my case.

Definition of Evolution - Organisms changing over time through generations

Now, we all know organisms have genes. One way for evolution to occur is through natural selection; organisms with genes that are more suitable for their environment are more likely to survive and reproduce while organisms with less suitable genes are more likely to die off before they reproduce. Next thing you know, the whole species has the suitable gene.

You have yourself an evolution.

One good example of this is the evolution of the peppered tree moth, which is recent, within 200 years. There once upon a time was a white colored tree moth, which could camoflage very well with trees and stuff. There was a gene out there however that created a rare black - colored tree moth, which only .01% of the population had. Usually, the black ones would get eaten because they couldn't hide very well. However, because of the Industrial Revolution, the trees became all black and poluted, and the BLACK tree moth was able to blend in and survive and reproduce, while the white ones got eaten because they couldn't hide very well. Nowadays, like 99% of peppered tree moths are black.

You have yourself evolution

http://en.wikipedia.org...
rougeagent21

Con

First let me define evolution as: The Development of higher species (Such as humans) that have evolved (or changed) from lower species as a result of natural selection and the passing down of common genes to the next generation. (Common ideas of "evolvees" are fish, apes, and even yeasts)
This is how I define evolution. It is similar to my opponents, but is specific to avoid arguing semantics. I will first make my own case, and then move on to attack my opponent's.

Let me first define realistic as it pertains to the resolution.
"interested in, concerned with, or based on what is real or practical: a realistic estimate of costs; a realistic planner. "
Based on this definition, one must look to whether or not evolution is "realistic."

Now, to fully understand the theory of evolution, one must first have a basic understanding of genetics. Traits are passed down from one generation to the next by alleles. Alleles are located on the chromosomes, and determine the phenotype of an organism. Here is an important part: The phenotype of an organism is dependant on the genotype, or the genetic makeup of an organism. If the gene is not present, that neither can the phenotype. So, lets apply this to common evolutionary theories.

One common theory is Lamarck's proposition of evolution. This basically says that phenotype is based on usage. He givs the examples of the blindness in moles, and the large claw on some crabs. Applying proven scientific facts, this cannot be true. Since phenotype is based on genotype, this cannot be the case.

Another common theory is Darwin's. Similar problems occur within his theory. He says fish started walking on land, and turned into little crawlers, which turned into bigger critters, which turned into apes, which turned into humans. Again, science is against this theory. How does a fish get oxygen-competent lungs? Or even legs for that matter? How does it get toes? Lose its scales? Lose its fins? Get hair?! This is an absurd theory. Granted, neither Darwin nor Lamarck knew what we do now about genetics. They could not have know. But, with what we know for fact, these are absolutely implausible ideas. Now to address my opponent's case.

--HIS FIRST POINT--
"One way for evolution to occur is through natural selection; organisms with genes that are more suitable for their environment are more likely to survive and reproduce while organisms with less suitable genes are more likely to die off before they reproduce. Next thing you know, the whole species has the suitable gene."
Seems plausible enough, right? However, we must look to what he means by "suitable gene." As he is arguing FOR evolution, we can only assume that he means the formation of new genes via mutation. Now, an organism can mutate a longer neck, or stronger muscles, or a smaller beak. What an organism CANNOT mutate, is a respiratory system, organelles, and even organs for that matter! Evolution IS NOT plausible, because it contradicts scientific fact.

--HIS SECOND POINT--
My opponent seems to be mis-informed about his peppered tree moths. This experiment was actually RECALLED FROM TEXTBOOKS because it was found to be a faulty experiment. The scientist actually pinned the white moths to the trees! This example is completely faulty. However, for the sake of the debate, one might assume that this could actually happen. This could actually happen. It is simple genetics, and is completely plausible. This does not further the affirmative case! This is a minor mutation, and is scientifically realistic. Take an albino lizard for example. THIS IS NOT EVOLUTION. Please note that it is not the development of a higher species.

Having taken down my opponent's case, I await his rebuttals. Thank you.

http://www.bartleby.com...
http://www.phschool.com...
http://www.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
vorxxox

Pro

vorxxox forfeited this round.
rougeagent21

Con

Well, seeing as my opponent has forfeited, I urge a negative ballot. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
vorxxox

Pro

vorxxox forfeited this round.
rougeagent21

Con

Please vote con. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
vorxxox

Pro

vorxxox forfeited this round.
rougeagent21

Con

Well, I'm sorry this could have not developed further. Please vote con.
Debate Round No. 5
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
If you are referring to me, I am saying that micro-evolution is realistic. Macro-evolution is not. That is what I am debating. (Please look to my definition of evolution)
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Another target for votebombing...

He seems to be defending microevolution and then saying it is macroevolution.
which is he debating?
Posted by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
Well, hopefully I'll provide you with the evidence to make a decision then! ;)
Posted by SnowRainandSleet 7 years ago
SnowRainandSleet
Interesting enough. I personally don't know. Either it is or it isn't.
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
I-am-a-panda
Debating is concerned with having the hard facts and disproving your opponents facts. You remind me of a feller named Josh.......
Posted by CerebralCortex 7 years ago
CerebralCortex
Let me tell you something my friend. Debates are not only for scoring points, the real purpose is to improve a person's ability to articulate, rationalize and come up with ideas. Looking at some of your debates it always seems to me like you are out for technical wins. Well good luck anyway.
Posted by PoeJoe 7 years ago
PoeJoe
The -ic suffix makes the resolution imply something similar to: Hey dude! Did you play that new video game that came out? Awww, man. The graphics are so realistic!
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
I-am-a-panda
Is this a debate concerning the validility of the evolution theory?
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by TFranklin62 7 years ago
TFranklin62
vorxxoxrougeagent21Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Blown2Bits4ever 7 years ago
Blown2Bits4ever
vorxxoxrougeagent21Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Riley09 7 years ago
Riley09
vorxxoxrougeagent21Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by vorxxox 7 years ago
vorxxox
vorxxoxrougeagent21Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Justinisthecrazy 7 years ago
Justinisthecrazy
vorxxoxrougeagent21Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
vorxxoxrougeagent21Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07