The Instigator
400spartans
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
acdramaqueen2004
Con (against)
Losing
2 Points

Evolution is true

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
400spartans
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/10/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 455 times Debate No: 66684
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

400spartans

Pro

First round is for acceptance only, BOP is shared.
acdramaqueen2004

Con

If this round is for acceptance, I welcome voters and my worthy competitor. I am on the con side of evolution, and am proud of it, as I have always been a rather religious person.
Debate Round No. 1
400spartans

Pro

First of all, evolution is backed up by many discoveries and scientific papers. Here are two discoveries backing evolution:

1. Fossil Record

The fossil record includes numerous fossils showing evolution. From tiktaalik to Australopithecus garhi, it is clear that evolution is a fact.

2. Pseudogenes

Pseudogenes are like normal DNA code except that they are deactivated from a mutation. It is much like a spelling error in a book or a misplaced island on a map. If two species have the same pseudogene, it is very strong evidence for common descent, one of the key factors for evolution.

Here is one more link that will basically sum up evolution's vast collection of evidence:

http://en.wikipedia.org...
acdramaqueen2004

Con

It is obvious you have done your research, so kudos for that, my competitor. Although, I have done research of my own.

Of course, I would start out with the Bible. Please do not stop reading here, voters, if you do not believe. Hear me out. There have been "fossils" of bibles, found around charcoal, used as pencils, parchment and blankets for listening to sermons. Even dated back to where they think the world began.

I can prove that evolution is fake without the Bible, as many people have different religions. Take a look at these links:
http://www.ucg.org...
http://humansarefree.com...
http://www.icr.org...

Also, Wikipedia is not a reliable source, because people can easily change it.

Thank you for reading! I await my competitors comeback. I am still ding more research.
Debate Round No. 2
400spartans

Pro

I am sorry to say that your links don't actually make a dent in evolution. Here are some of the well known examples:

1. UCG Fossils

The absence of transitional forms is actually not true. We have found many, but deniers of evolution work like this.

Anti-Evolution: Where's the transitional form between A and C?
Scientist: We've found transitional form B between A and C
Anti-Evolution: Hah! Where's the transitional form between A and B and between B and C?

2. HumansAreFree Random

Here's a quote:

Time does not make impossible things possible. As an example, a computer was programmed in an attempt to arrive at the simple 26-letter alphabet. After 35,000,000,000,000 (35 trillion) attempts it has only arrived at 14 letters correctly. What are the odds that a simple single cell organism could evolve given the complexity of more than 60,000 proteins of 100 different configurations all in the correct places? Never in eternity! Time does not make impossible things possible. (...)

This is the assumption that you just randomly type stuff until you get what you want. This is false: evolution works like as follows:

1. Randomly type stuff
2. Keep the letters that are in the correct position
3. Repeat

This has been shown to take not that much time at all.

3. HumansAreFree Birds

Here's another (false) quote:
One of the best examples of evolution nonsense is the thought that a wingless bird began to evolve a wing. Why this would occur is not answered by evolutionists. The wing stub did not make the bird more adaptable to his environment. The first wing stubs would be much too small for the bird to fly. Why would a bird evolve wing stubs that are useless? This is backwards from the evolutionary theory of natural selection, which states that birds adapt and change in order to survive better in their environment. The bird with a half-size wing is placed at a disadvantage in its environment.

See: https://www.youtube.com...

In this video, it is shown that half a wing can protect animals from fall. Thus, Natural Selection chooses half a wing over no wing.

4. ICR 2nd Law

This is a common misconception about the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Gaining entropy only happens in a isolated area. However, the earth isn't isolated. The key thing here is the sun. The sun has produced light and heat to reverse entropy on earth.

5. ICR Anti-Creationism

Here's the reason why we are opposed to creationism: It has barely any evidence.

This would be like pre-1969 years where a religion said the moon is made out of green cheese. Sure, we didn't know if it was, but there was a lot of evidence refuting that the moon was made out of green cheese.

One last thing: if you were to search up all of those transitional forms in Wikipedia, just about all of them would be legitimate.
acdramaqueen2004

Con

Your quotes and links can not match my skill level
I am very sure that you copied and pasted half that stuff. In consideration of that, I wish that you would please type everything. Thank you.
Evolution is fake- how did they evolve? A deformed lizard, then a monkey that's way to tall, then peach colored spear holders? How can that compare to the Bible, which over 15 religions believe in?
Fact is, this is opinion. However, I want everyone on my side. Thank you for letting me into this debate. I do wish to remind you I am a beginner.
Debate Round No. 3
400spartans

Pro

1. Evolution

Yes, they evolved that way. However, there were thousands of generations between those species. This allows change and adaption.

(Note: Monkeys are distant cousins of humans.)

2. Bible

15 Religions believe in the bible? What about the hundreds of religions on earth. And don't forget the religions of habited planets. Your bandwagon argument is flawed.

(P.S. This is my first debate)
acdramaqueen2004

Con

acdramaqueen2004 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
400spartans

Pro

I do not have anything to say, because my opponent forfeited the last round.
acdramaqueen2004

Con

acdramaqueen2004 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Iloveuk12 2 years ago
Iloveuk12
if evulotion is real then there should be fossil evidence until then im not going to believe in it
Posted by Valkrin 2 years ago
Valkrin
Is this talking about micro or macro?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
400spartansacdramaqueen2004Tied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were nonsensical, and Con ff several times.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 1 year ago
Blade-of-Truth
400spartansacdramaqueen2004Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:42 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Pro. Con forfeited multiple rounds in this debate which is rarely acceptable behavior in any debate setting. S&G - Tie. Both had adequate spelling and grammar. Arguments - Pro. Con failed to negate the latest arguments raised by Pro. Due to leaving Pro's arguments unchallenged, Pro wins arguments. Sources - Con. I found con's sources to be greater in both quality and quantity. Thus Con wins sources.