The Instigator
Vox_Veritas
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
GoOrDin
Con (against)
Winning
90 Points

Evolution is true and Creationists are dumb

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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 17 votes the winner is...
GoOrDin
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/29/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,910 times Debate No: 64177
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (80)
Votes (17)

 

Vox_Veritas

Pro

First Round is for acceptance. Burden of Proof is on my opponent because I am not making a claim I am merely bringing into question Creationist claims.
GoOrDin

Con

First round ended
Debate Round No. 1
Vox_Veritas

Pro

Guys the proof for evolution is undeniable. Creationists like to claim "Evolution cannot be seen in action therefore it is false." But I say BULLPOOP!
HERE is all the proof of evolution that you need: footage of evolution in progress! Watch this bird evolve!
http://www.bing.com...
SEE?! You cannot deny science after seeing this, you deceived misinformed Creationist!

Now, what I've shown you already proves Creationism, but here's some more indisputable proof.

TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS:
Despite the Creationist lie that there are no transitional fossils, here's a few indisputable transitional life forms:http://www.bing.com...
The one on the right is a transitional life form.
Then, there's this:
http://www.bing.com...
The one in the middle is a transitional life form.

As you can see, I've already proven evolution...twice! But, I'm not done quite yet.
Here's my third and final proof for evolution:
A fruit that evolved beyond normal fruit. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this wondrous creature is the result of millions of years old natural selection.
http://www.bing.com...

Checkmate! I've proven evolution to be true THREE TIMES!
GoOrDin

Con

Alright Vox, your proofs are incredibly overwhelming. I will be pushed to my limits ~ especially when trying to contain the rage built up by the Most-aggravating-Fruit.

I would like to begin by stipulating first hand, that the Pepper Moth, which is a prominent example to support Evolution is not a valid example. The Pepper moth has an innate ability to alter it's color to match and suit it's environment. This is not evolution, it is in fact, just the Pepper Moth.

Indicating that missing link fossils are available still does not explain why historically, Dragons are very prominent, all across the globe. And one might even stipulate we ate them, cooked them, and celebrated in doing so until they were all gone.

However, this is is nothing compared to the Facts.

Creationism states that Matter existed before energy.
So when drawing a map of creation,
1.) First one must indicate that a Universal Law comes into existence.
2.) one must acknowledge that in this model Matter exists without energy as the primordial state of the Cosmos.
3.) One must believe that when studying atoms, that they would react the same way without electrons in them as with electrons in them and "cling" together.
4.) That this model indicates that the first ignition of energy occurred on the surface of the planet Earth because the Entire Cosmos as an entity was centered here to follow out the Law first set in place before the primordial state took place.
5.) that Light, is energy, and energy is the measure of all time, and thus Light is Time itself, the First day.
6.) energy like matter clings to things as a primary function, and thus does not explode into space, but clings to the stuff of Earth's outer-layers, which are the least dense matter, where they had gathered by law of physics.
7.) thus the least dense atoms are molecularized first, establishing two bodies of water.
7.2) Water is the molecular substance that makes up both sky and liquid water, proving the second day of creation to be scientifically accurate.
8.) Now the energy must go somewhere, but all the least dense matter is energized so it delves deeper and forms the crust of the earth.
9.) The energy continues deeper and expands the inner parts of the Earth and cracks the crust open. Proving the third day of creation via geological evidence / proofs.
10.) Now the energy is everywhere in the planet, but the Spark is in the earth, with Water between itself and open space.
10.2) so green seeds miraculously appear as the energy crosses from the earth into the water for the first time despite the impeding nature of the task.
11.) The energy then goes out into space for the first time because it is finally the easiest path of travel for the electrons to go on.
11.2) but the energy must cling to itself there, and accumulates the sun about the earths surface,
12.) thus the moon is gathered by the suns growth and situated next to the earth, while the sun takes a new path around both of these bodies.
13.) Mercury and Venus follow as the sun grows, and then mars and it's moons prior to the asteroid belt.
14.) Jupiter, Neptune and Uranus likely develop simultaneously, but not necessarily, until the Oort cloud forms and then with the vast emptiness of space, the next star begins to form.

This model, which is scientifically sound, has been used for 6000 years to illustrate the creation of our universe, and it's credited origin is the Creator of the Universe himself who values morality over all things.
This illustration of creation was carried and used by Abraham, even when all other followers of the Monotheist Hindu religion converted to paganism and contorted their faiths. Abraham indicated his God was infinite and without physical form besides his cosmological self, as this was the God worshiped by his son, grandson, and great grandson, who said This was the God of their father Abraham. Not any physical being.

Thus the four first days of creation are far superior to any other theory.

In addition, Greek mythology was a worship of a Monotheist creator as well. Chaos created and established all things without the aid of any other deity and no other creative properties followed this. Chaos established the primordial substances of reality, the Titanous elements of nature: Earth, Sea, Stars and Sun, Sky, Time. When Man subdued these elements as God had instructed Adam, the Golden age ended and man moved into cities, and there he paid tax to himself.

As Jesus had said, "You cannot know me nor can you know my father": You cannot know Chaos.

The moral condition of earth also proves God's existence.
If math was the law of the universe then one would be stipulating by believing this that they have no free will, for all things are predetermined by a mathematical consequence with an unavoidable end. This does not stand up in court, or in an argument, or when someone steals robs or kills, and thus cannot be used as a sane thesis for the explanation of life. Man does have free-will and we are guilty for our crimes.

In addition, the thesis behind dating rocks is illogical because there is no comparative results to prove the findings. All the formulas for dating rocks are founded on the atheistic principal of deluding a crowd which wishes to be deluded, whilst the math is redundantly irrelevant to discovering any true information out about the rocks.
You cannot say one theory is accurate until it is proven, and thus cannot be proven, because dating things of such a unrecorded existence, means applying mathematical consequence to every viable in weather and condition. Now they suggest two mathematical processes support one another but neither support themselves.

So Creation is accurate and Evolution is delusion.
Debate Round No. 2
Vox_Veritas

Pro

Dont listen to anything my opponent says for he is a Creationist therefore everything he says is pseudoscience lies nothing h he says in faver of Creationism is true it is all elaborate deception gibberish disguised as sounding like science and evolution is proven true because 70% of Americans agree that evolution is true so checkmate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GoOrDin

Con

there are no fruits to saying Atheism is accurate.

Saying atheism is accurate, liberates:
-Political injustice via lack of obligation.
-neglectful relationship due to lack of obligation.
-war. do to lack of security.
-lack of self concern and control leading to miss-spending, interpreting, considering etc..

atheism promotes a false governing system,
promotes perverts, like rapists, abductors, abusers, abandoners, etc...

Atheist neglect all forms of trying o help themselves and others in a factual way, neglecting o acknowledge their negative influence on peoples perspectives, morals, ambitions, desires and success.

thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
80 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Vox_Veritas 2 years ago
Vox_Veritas
It's true. I was just trolling.
Posted by GoOrDin 2 years ago
GoOrDin
I have never seent he first page of the Bible compared to modern science before i did it 5 years ago.
Posted by GoOrDin 2 years ago
GoOrDin
@Bagelmaster10 , A main principal of Atheism is that there is no reason to look for logic or use it, because the end purpose and result is redundant, and the functional effects of denying reason result in liberal activity and lack of responsibility, in relationships, health, and political poverty.

@ Bennett91,
I'll testify to the Bing comment. Bing is garbage. I use it from time to time.

@ UndeniableReality,
Your comments are like Vox's arguments in the way that you do not rationalize what I have said prior to replying: Which is unnecessary because we are on a forum; you have plenty of time to think. (how atheism has a negative effect on morals and responsibilities. )
-Atheist think Carbon dating is logical and use it as science. But the formula is scientifically flawed, because the pattern is not Factual, int eh sense that is not observably repeating, unto over 2000 years into the dating process.
-Evolution and the use of missing links does not prove evolution, it merely insinuates it is potentially possible. These creatures could have been killed and eaten or destroyed in catastrophe of which many are named in the Bible.
-And the First page of the Bible when compared to modern science is Physically and scientifically factual and proven.

Hence all your remarks were in likeness to Vox.
Posted by UndeniableReality 2 years ago
UndeniableReality
I think some of you may not have realized that Pro is a creationist and this is a troll debate.
Posted by notyourbusiness 2 years ago
notyourbusiness
Pro simply copies and pastes hyperlinks and makes unproved, non-objective statements. He loses completely.
Posted by Eli01 2 years ago
Eli01
Dude your arguments about evolution are not even real. Pokemon, really? Pokemon are not real creatures.
Posted by Bagelmaster10 2 years ago
Bagelmaster10
I believe in evolution and am an athiest, but this athiest just gives other athiests a bad name.

""Atheist neglect all forms of trying o help themselves and others in a factual way, neglecting o acknowledge their negative influence on peoples perspectives, morals, ambitions, desires and success.'""

While I don't agree with this- radical christians tend to do this just as much as much as radical athiests- and Athiests merely look for the logical side of things, this athiest (pro) didn't even bother to read the con's argument. Instead, pro stuck to his own beliefs and just spewed moronic gibberish at con, as if thats going to get his point across.

That is not the point of a debate.

While I'm sticking to my belief that evolution is real and god doesn't exist, con was certainly better conducted and had good, solid evidence.

Pro, grow up.
Posted by Bennett91 2 years ago
Bennett91
And Vox uses Bing. No self respecting person, let alone an atheist uses Bing.
Posted by UndeniableReality 2 years ago
UndeniableReality
Yes, my comments are just like vox's arguments.
Posted by GoOrDin 2 years ago
GoOrDin
i thought he did quite nicely. He replicated their exact behavior from every one I had encountered, including those arguing int his comment thread.
17 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by TheodoretheMan 2 years ago
TheodoretheMan
Vox_VeritasGoOrDinTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: was that supposed to be a debate on pros part?
Vote Placed by sherlockholmesfan2798 2 years ago
sherlockholmesfan2798
Vox_VeritasGoOrDinTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: This does not require an explanation.
Vote Placed by Kylar 2 years ago
Kylar
Vox_VeritasGoOrDinTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: I am a creationist baptist Christian
Vote Placed by Lightningstar 2 years ago
Lightningstar
Vox_VeritasGoOrDinTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Doesn't really require an explanation.
Vote Placed by Envisage 2 years ago
Envisage
Vox_VeritasGoOrDinTied
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: A glance at Pro's final round indirectly refutes his own resolution.
Vote Placed by Defro 2 years ago
Defro
Vox_VeritasGoOrDinTied
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 committed argumentum ad populum, otherwise known as the bandwagon fallacy, when he claimed evolution is true because 70% of Americans believe in it. He also committed ad hominen, therefore he loses points in conduct. Overall, Con provided a sufficient rebuttal to earn him a win.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Vox_VeritasGoOrDinTied
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 completely fails to rebut con.
Vote Placed by Tweka 2 years ago
Tweka
Vox_VeritasGoOrDinTied
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: Pro has not refuted many arguments that Con provide.
Vote Placed by Reeseroni 2 years ago
Reeseroni
Vox_VeritasGoOrDinTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro provides a terrible argument!
Vote Placed by Squirrelnuts57 2 years ago
Squirrelnuts57
Vox_VeritasGoOrDinTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con wins. Plus Vox_Veritas's account says he is christian. What the heck?