The Instigator
Passionate_Fighter
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Stonehe4rt
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

Evolution is the only way to go with dining the truth which is the existence of God

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 3 votes the winner is...
Stonehe4rt
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/21/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 287 times Debate No: 88595
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

Passionate_Fighter

Pro

Good day Debate.org community.
I will start by providing the definitions of evolution and God before I initially start the debate with my contender.

Evolution:
the process by which different kinds of living organism are believed to have developed from earlier forms during the history of the earth.
(as defined by google)

God:
(in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
(as defined by google)

May the best contestant win.
Stonehe4rt

Con

Hello! Alright so I am Con to this topic, however, I will not be trying to disprove God, however, I am Con to Evolution being the "only way to go". I actually believe that when it comes to God he shouldn't be locked down by man-made theories and broken scientific laws. I am not saying all Science is bull crap, if I did then how would I prove my case? Lol. What I will be aiming for is too show that many scientific theories that make Evolution the "only way to go" are flawed and should be discarded. Hence leaving other possibilities, and Evolution not being the "Only way to go".

I agree with the definitions given by Pro. Evolution is suppose to show how organisms developed from different previous organisms. I will show historic proof and artifacts found to disprove intelligence being evolved from earlier life forms, in fact I believe there has always been humans.

My last prerequisite is that your topic states that "Evolution is the only way to go with dining the truth which is the existence of God" However what if someone just believes in God and doesnt believe in Evolution. They are believing in the Truth that God exist but not Evolution. So you will have to show how believing in Evolution is the only way to believe in God existing and you cant have one and not the other.

Good luck!
Debate Round No. 1
Passionate_Fighter

Pro

Passionate_Fighter forfeited this round.
Stonehe4rt

Con

Um... OK.

I will be arguing the Humans may have not been evolved. Some cases I can provide for this are:
- Artifacts that prove human intelligence dating before Humans supposedly evolved.
- Human Foot Prints in the same soil timeline as Dinosaurs!
- And some flaws in Evolution.


Okay, so firstly as told by http://www.universetoday.com...
Humans have only been around for 2,000 years, and Homo saipens only had evolved on Earth 2 Million Years ago.


Now with that out of the way:

1. Artifacts:
- 6 Million Year Old Brass Bell. As seen before according to Evolution Homo Saipens came about 2 million years ago, however this Bell was around 4 Million Years before that! So what had the intelligence to heat metal, pour metal, and forge this bell? Also according this the site, the earliest industrialization only came about 200 years ago, in the 1800s. So how did this bell come about?

- 400 Million Year Old Hammer. This is just funny, this Hammer was found to have 96% Pure Iron! Never has this been found before in nature without the assistance of from nearly modern age blacksmithing! So how did someone manage this 400 Million Years Ago?

- 100 Million Year Old HUMAN Finger! If this doesnt prove something, I am not sure what will! Yes people have found a Finger that is 100 million years old! That is 98 Millions Year before the First Homo Saipen according to Evolution.

- 2.8 BILLION YEAR OLD Klerksdorp spheres! This is something that not even to this day we can manage to achieve unless we used anti gravity. Reason being is that it is so perfectly balanced it would be nigh impossible for someone to have made this, escpecially when we hadn't even evolved yet supposedly.

- 250 Million Year Old Microchip! You should get the point by now. Technology that has been around for that long just proves that Humans didnt evolve from something, they have always been around.

http://www.theburningplatform.com...
http://www.ancient-code.com...
http://maltanow.com.mt...



Human Foot Prints in same timeline as Dinosaurs:
The "answer" to this that we have been given is that the Human prints of the same time and in the same rock as the visibly clear dinosaur prints was actually also a dinosaur print that eroded over time to look human. This begs to question, why didnt the other print in the same rock that was made during the same timeling erode? Or what if the assumption that they eroded is false? Sure it could be, however there isn't anything to prove it, just a theory that they eroded. However it could very well be human foot prints! Seeing how this is an illogical answer, many people then jumped to the fact that it was a hoax, however under the rock down and many layers down to the bed rock we find the same prints! So unless someone has the ability to carve the first layer of the ground, then go through the rest of it without carving through then carving into the Bed rock, it was not a hoax.

http://www.talkorigins.org...
http://maltanow.com.mt...

We are all told the simple "fact" that Humans didnt evolve from apes but instead a common ancestor. Well try to find that "common ancestor" they cannot give you proper date, time or name that creature existed. They call it the CHLCA, literally meaning the Chimpanzee–human last common ancestor. So what exactly did we evolve from? And given the knowledge above, and knowing these creatures weren't intelligent since they weren't homo saipen yet, where did the artifacts come from?

https://en.wikipedia.org...

There are many creatures that have been around for hundreds of Millions of Years! Yet none have evolved? For example, the Horseshoe Crab, its been around for 300 million some years! Never evolved. Jellyfish, been around for 505 million years, half of a billion! And thats just the latest findings. Or the Sponge, that, we dont even truly know how long its been around. They estimate a bit after the first bacteria but they dont even have an exact date, its been around longer then we can figure out. Yet it has never evolved. Or even the Six Gilled Shark (Cow Shark) That was found, supposedly it had evolved away, but we found it, it dates back to 190 million years ago.

http://mom.me...

As you can see, it is fairly crazy to believe in Evolution, it would be much more logical if our dating methods are just not accurate at all. Which would then not give Evolution any backing because if they can't date things properly how does anything about the times of things that evolved work? It would be more logical to believe that the world is 10,000 years old and have a Creationist view. So there, you can logically have a Creationist view and believe in God.
Debate Round No. 2
Passionate_Fighter

Pro

Passionate_Fighter forfeited this round.
Stonehe4rt

Con

My opponet has now forfeited twice. So whether this isn't really much of a debate. However none of my points have been addressed obviously and henceforth are left to stand.

Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 3
Passionate_Fighter

Pro

Passionate_Fighter forfeited this round.
Stonehe4rt

Con

Seeing as my opponet has not met their BoP, and has forfeited nearly very round, I have nothing more to say. Only that I hope everyone votes for me!

^_^
Debate Round No. 4
Passionate_Fighter

Pro

Passionate_Fighter forfeited this round.
Stonehe4rt

Con

Well I am a bit saddened that so many people are forfeiting, makes it hard to find a good debate.

Pro has not shown how someone must believe in Evolution to believe in God, while I have shown that someone can believe that Evolution is not true and also believe in God.

Vote Con
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Edlvsjd 10 months ago
Edlvsjd
Passionate_FighterStonehe4rtTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Leugen9001 10 months ago
Leugen9001
Passionate_FighterStonehe4rtTied
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: Conduct goes to Con due to Pro's forfeitures. I'm undecided over arguments, as an appearant typo in the motion made it impossible to understand what the debate was about. Was it about how evolution is the only way to go when you "deny" the existence of G-d, or was it about something else? Con's case doesn't seem to go with the first interpretation of the motion, since if the first interpretation were true, Con would have needed to argue that an atheist didn't need to believe in evolution.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 10 months ago
dsjpk5
Passionate_FighterStonehe4rtTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff many times, so conduct to Con. Con was also the only one who made an argument, so arguments to Con by default.