The Instigator
Anti-atheist
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
devient.genie
Con (against)
Losing
5 Points

God exist

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 3 votes the winner is...
Anti-atheist
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/23/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,838 times Debate No: 31625
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (31)
Votes (3)

 

Anti-atheist

Pro

Let's see what u got!

Accept in R1 only
devient.genie

Con

Let's imagine that I tell you the following story:

There is a man who lives at the North Pole.
He lives there with his wife and a bunch of elves.
During the year, he and the elves build toys.
Then, on Christmas Eve, he loads up a sack with all the toys.
He puts the sack in his sleigh.
He hitches up eight (or possibly nine) flying reindeer.
He then flies from house to house, landing on the rooftops of each one.
He gets out with his sack and climbs down the chimney.
He leaves toys for the children of the household.
He climbs back up the chimney, gets back in his sleigh, and flies to the next house.
He does this all around the world in one night.
Then he flies back to the North Pole to repeat the cycle next year.
This, of course, is the story of Santa Claus.
But let's say that I am an adult, and I am your friend, and I reveal to you that I believe that this story is true. I believe it with all my heart. And I try to talk about it with you and convert you to believe it as I do.

What would you think of me? You would think that I am delusional, and rightly so.

Why do you think that I am delusional? It is because you know that Santa is imaginary. The story is a total fairy tale. No matter how much I talk to you about Santa, you are not going to believe that Santa is real. Flying reindeer, for example, are make-believe. The dictionary defines delusion as, "A false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence." That definition fits perfectly.

Since you are my friend, you might try to help me realize that my belief in Santa is a delusion. The way that you would try to do that is by asking me some questions. For example, you might say to me:

"But how can the sleigh carry enough toys for everyone in the world?" I say to you that the sleigh is magical. It has the ability to do this intrinsically.

"How does Santa get into houses and apartments that don't have chimneys?" I say that Santa can make chimneys appear, as shown to all of us in the movie The Santa Clause.

"How does Santa get down the chimney if there's a fire in the fireplace?" I say that Santa has a special flame-resistant suit, and it cleans itself too.

"Why doesn't the security system detect Santa?" Santa is invisible to security systems.

"How can Santa travel fast enough to visit every child in one night?" Santa is timeless.

"How can Santa know whether every child has been bad or good?" Santa is omniscient.

"Why are the toys distributed so unevenly? Why does Santa deliver more toys to rich kids, even if they are bad, than he ever gives to poor kids?" There is no way for us to understand the mysteries of Santa because we are mere mortals, but Santa has his reasons. For example, perhaps poor children would be unable to handle a flood of expensive electronic toys. How would they afford the batteries? So Santa spares them this burden.
These are all quite logical questions that you have asked. I have answered all of them for you. I am wondering why you can't see what I see, and you are wondering how I can be so insane.
Why didn't my answers satisfy you? Why do you still know that I am delusional? It is because my answers have done nothing but confirm your assessment. My answers are ridiculous. In order to answer your questions, I invented, completely out of thin air, a magical sleigh, a magical self-cleaning suit, magical chimneys, "timelessness" and magical invisibility. You don't believe my answers because you know that I am making this stuff up. The invalidating evidence is voluminous.

Another Example

Imagine that I tell you the following story:

I was in my room one night.
Suddenly, my room became exceedingly bright.
Next thing I know there is an angel in my room.
He tells me an amazing story.
He says that there is a set of ancient golden plates buried in the side of a hill in New York.
On them are the books of a lost race of jewish people who inhabited North America.
These plates bear inscriptions in the foreign language of these people.
Eventually the angel leads me to the plates and lets me take them home.
Even though the plates are in a foreign language, the angel helps me to decipher and translate them.
Then the plates are taken up into heaven, never to be seen again.
I have the book that I translated from the plates. It tells of amazing things -- an entire civilization of jewish people living here in the United States 2,000 years ago.
And the resurrected jesus came and visited these people!
I also showed the golden plates to a number of real people who are my eye witnesses, and I have their signed attestations that they did, in fact, see and touch the plates before the plates were taken up into heaven.
Now, what would you say to me about this story? Even though I do have a book, in English, that tells the story of this lost jewish civilization, and even though I do have the signed attestations, what do you think? This story sounds nutty, doesn't it?
You would ask some obvious questions. For example, at the very simplest level, you might ask, "Where are the ruins and artifacts from this jewish civilization in America?" The book transcribed from the plates talks about millions of jewish people doing all kinds of things in America. They have horses and oxen and chariots and armor and large cities. What happened to all of this? I answer simply: it is all out there, but we have not found it yet. "Not one city? Not one chariot wheel? Not one helmet?" you ask. No, we haven't found a single bit of evidence, but it is out there somewhere. You ask me dozens of questions like this, and I have answers for them all.

Most people would assume that I am delusional if I told them this story. They would assume that there were no plates and no angel, and that I had written the book myself. Most people would ignore the attestations -- having people attest to it means nothing, really. I could have paid the attesters off, or I could have fabricated them. Most people would reject my story without question.

What's interesting is that there are millions of people who actually do believe this story of the angel and the plates and the book and the jewish people living in North America 2,000 years ago. Those millions of people are members of the mormon church, headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah. The person who told this incredible story was a man named joseph smith, and he lived in the United States in the early 1800s. He told his story, and recorded what he "translated from the plates", in the book of mormon.

If you meet a mormon and ask them about this story, they can spend hours talking to you about it. They can answer every question you have. Yet the 6 billion of us who are not mormons can see with total clarity that the mormons are delusional. It is as simple as that. You and I both know with 100% certainty that the mormon story is no different from the story of Santa. And we are correct in our assessment. The invalidating evidence is Immeasurable.

Scatology in the bible? In psychology, a scatology is an obsession with excretion or excrement, or the study of such obsessions. In a sexual context, scatology refers to the romanticism of fecal matter, whether in passing admiration, the use of feces in various sexual acts, or simply the act of seeing it. Entire subcultures in sexuality are devoted to this fetish. Look up lazy "god did it" kids :)

Malachi 2:2-3

New International Version (NIV)

2 If you do not listen, and if you do not resolve to honor my name," says the Lord Almighty, "I will send a curse on you, and I will curse your blessings. Yes, I have already cursed them, because you have not resolved to honor me.

3 "Because of you I will rebuke your descendants; I will smear on your faces the dung from your festival sacrifices, and you will be carried off with it.

Your Love in Poop,

The Morality Master
Debate Round No. 1
Anti-atheist

Pro

Your argument fails because it would be reasonable if it has evidence! Which it does. Sometimes you just can't trust your current resoning. This is what my first argument shows

1. The Problem of Induction

The problem of induction is a bad bad thing for atheists.

The original problem of induction can be simply put. It concerns the support or justification of inductive methods; methods that predict or infer, in Hume's words, that “instances of which we have had no experience resemble those of which we have had experience” (THN, 89). Such methods are clearly essential in scientific reasoning as well as in the conduct of our everyday affairs. The problem is how to support or justify them and it leads to a dilemma: the principle cannot be proved deductively, for it is contingent, and only necessary truths can be proved deductively. Nor can it be supported inductively—by arguing that it has always or usually been reliable in the past—for that would beg the question by assuming just what is to be proved.

His argument fails for that reason

2. Argument from contingent motion of atoms by Science and Philo

What is the binding force of the atom? You would probably Gluons. Gluons are a made-up dream. No one has ever seen or measured them... they don't exist! It's a desperate theory to explain away truth! We know that the electrons of the atom whirl around the nucleus billions of times every millionth of a second... and that the nucleus of the atom consists of particles called neutrons and protons. Neutrons have no electrical charge and are therefore neutral --BUT-- Protons have positive charges. One law of electricity is: LIKE CHARGES REPEL EACH OTHER! Since all the protons in the nucleus are positively charged, they should repel each other and scatter into space. If gluons aren't the answer... what is?

The answer is Jesus.

This is supported by the Aristotelian idea of motion. For Aristotle and Aquinas, motion did not mean spatial movement, it meant change. For the ancient Greek philosopher Parmenides, change is nonexistent; for this entails that a state of affairs, such as my microwave oven blaring obnoxiously, must come from another state of affairs, my microwave oven’s silence. To Parmenides, this is impossible – the being of my microwave’s blaring comes from the non-being of my microwave’s silence, but ex nihilo, nihil fit, Parmenides says: out of non-being, no being can come. Aristotle responded to this argument with the distinction between potentiality and actuality – that is, the new state of affairs exists as a potential within the previous state of affairs, until it is actualized by that previous state. Now, we know that a potential cannot actualize itself, because it does not exist as a state of affairs yet. So only something actual can raise a potential to actuality. In the case of my microwave oven, the microwave oven must exist before it can raise its potential to trumpet cacophony. So what is actualized is actualized by an actual. However, we must stop somewhere – for only can we observe change if something is changing it; thus, an infinite regress of actuals is meaningless and would not be able to produce change. We come to Christ as a hierarchical system of motion (not a linear system of motion). Simply

  1. Since objects in the universe come into being and pass away, it is possible for those objects to exist or for those objects not to exist at any given time.
  2. Since objects are countable, the objects in the universe are finite in number.
  3. If, for all existent objects, they do not exist at some time, then, given infinite time, there would be nothing in existence. (Nothing can come from nothing—there is no creation ex nihilo) for individual existent objects.
  4. But, in fact, many objects exist in the universe.
  5. Therefore, a Necessary Being (i.e., a Being of which it is impossible that it should not exist) exists.

I have proven it!

devient.genie

Con

Another example

Imagine that I tell you this story:

A man was sitting in a cave minding his own business.
A very bright flash of light appeared.
A voice spoke out one word: "Read!" The man felt like he was being squeezed to death. This happened several times.
Then the man asked, "What should I read?"
The voice said, "Read in the name of your lord who created humans from a clinging zygote. Read for your lord is the most generous. He taught people by the pen what they didn't know before."
The man ran home to his wife.
While running home, he saw the huge face of an angel in the sky. The angel told the man that he was to be the messenger of god. The angel also identified himself as gabriel.
At home that night, the angel appeared to the man in his dreams.
gabriel appeared to the man over and over again. Sometimes it was in dreams, sometimes during the day as "revelations in his heart," sometimes preceded by a painful ringing in his ears (and then the verses would flow from gabriel right out of the man), and sometimes gabriel would appear in the flesh and speak. Scribes wrote down everything the man said.
Then, one night about 11 years after the first encounter with gabriel, gabriel appeared to the man with a magical horse. The man got on the horse, and the horse took him to jerusalem. Then the winged horse took the man up to the seven layers of heaven. The man was able to actually see heaven and meet and talk with people there. Then gabriel brought the man back to earth.
The man proved that he had actually been to jerusalem on the winged horse by accurately answering questions about buildings and landmarks there.
The man continued receiving the revelations from gabriel for 23 years, and then they stopped. All of the revelations were recorded by the scribes in a book which we still have today.
(Source: "understanding islam" by yahiya emerick, Alpha press, 2002)

What do you make of this story? If you have never heard the story before, you may find it to be nonsensical in the same way that you feel about the stories of the golden plates and Santa. You would especially feel that way once you read the book that was supposedly transcribed from gabriel, because much of it is opaque. The dreams, the horse, the angel, the ascension, and the appearances of the angel in the flesh -- you would dismiss them all because it is all imaginary.
But you need to be careful. This story is the foundation of the muslim religion, practiced by more than a billion people around the world. The man is named mohammed, and the book is the koran (also spelled qur'an or qur'aan). This is the sacred story of the koran's creation and the revelation of allah to mankind.

Despite the fact that a billion muslims claim some level of belief in this story, people outside the muslim faith consider the story to be imaginary. No one believes this story because this story is a fairy tale. They consider the koran to be a book written by a man and nothing more. A winged horse that flew to heaven? That is imaginary -- as imaginary as flying reindeer.

If you are a christian, please take a moment right now to look back at the mormon and muslim stories. Why is it so easy for you to look at these stories and see that they are imaginary fairy tales? How do you know, with complete certainty, that mormons and muslims are delusional? You know these things for the same reason you know that Santa is imaginary. There is no evidence for any of it. The stories involve magical things like angels and winged horses, hallucinations, dreams. Horses cannot fly -- we all know that. And even if they could, where would the horse fly to? The vacuum of space? Or is the horse somehow "dematerialized" and then "rematerialized" in heaven? If so, those processes are made up too. Every bit of it is imaginary. We all know that.

An unbiased observer can see how imaginary these three stories are. In addition, muslims can see that mormons are delusional, mormons can see that muslims are delusional, and christians can see that both mormons and muslims are delusional.

Now let me tell you one final story:

god inseminated a virgin named mary, in order to bring his son incarnate into our world.
mary and her fiance, joseph, had to travel to bethlehem to register for the census. There mary gave birth to the son of god.
god put a star in the sky to guide people to the baby.
In a dream god told joseph to take his family to egypt. Then god stood by and watched as herod killed thousands and thousands of babies in israel in an attempt to kill jesus.
As a man, god's son claimed that he was god incarnate: "I am the way, the truth and the life," he said.
This man performed many miracles. He healed lots of sick people. He turned water into wine. These miracles prove that he is god.
But he was eventually given the death sentence and killed by crucifixion.
His body was placed in a tomb.
But three days later, the tomb was empty.
And the man, alive once again but still with his wounds (so anyone who doubted could see them and touch them), appeared to many people in many places.
Then he ascended into heaven and now sits at the right hand of god the father almighty, never to be seen again.
Today you can have a personal relationship with the lord jesus. You can pray to this man and he will answer your prayers. He will cure your diseases, rescue you from emergencies, help you make important business and family decisions, comfort you in times of worry and grief, etc.
This man will also give you eternal life, and if you are good he has a place for you in heaven after you die.
The reason we know all this is because, after the man died, four people named matthew, mark, luke and john wrote accounts of the man's life. Their written attestations are proof of the veracity of this story.
This, of course, is the story of jesus. Do you believe this story? If you are a christian, you probably do. I could ask you questions for hours and you will have answers for every one of them, in just the same way that I had answers for all of the Santa questions that my friend asked me in Example 1. You cannot understand how anyone could question any of it, because it is so obvious to you.
Here is the thing that I would like to help you understand: The billions of people who are not christians look at the christian story in exactly the same way that you look at the Santa story, the mormon story and the muslim story. In other words, there are billio0ns of people who stand outside of the christian bubble, and they can see reality clearly. The fact is, the christian story is completely imaginary.

How do the four billion non-christians know, with complete certainty, that the christian story is imaginary? Because the christian story is just like the Santa story, the mormon story and the muslim story. There is the magical insemination, the magical star, the magical dreams, the magical miracles, the magical resurrection, the magical ascension and so on. People outside the christian faith look at the christian story and note these facts:

The miracles are supposed to "prove" that jesus is god, but, predictably, these miracles left behind no tangible evidence for us to examine and scientifically verify today. They all involved faith healings and magic tricks - see this proof.

jesus is resurrected, but, predictably, he does not appear to anyone today

jesus ascended into heaven and answers our prayers, but, predictably, when we pray to him nothing happens. We can statistically analyse prayer and find that prayers are never answered
The book where matthew, mark, luke and john make their attestations does exist, but, predictably, it is chock full of problems and contradictions

And so on.
In other words, the christian story is a fairly tale, just like the other three examples we have examined.
Debate Round No. 2
Anti-atheist

Pro

I'm not proposing any specific religion but a God belief in general. The other guy is ignoring my arguments. Look at the problem of induction we can't use our intuitive observations to conclude these things. I won
devient.genie

Con

Now, look at what is happening inside your mind at this moment. I am using solid, verifiable evidence to show you that the christian story is imaginary. Your rational mind can see the evidence. Billions of non-hristians would be happy to confirm for you that the christian story is imaginary. However, if you are a practicing christian, you can probably feel your "religious mind" overriding both your rational mind and your common sense as we speak. Why? Why were you able to use your common sense to so easily reject the Santa story, the mormon story and the muslim story, but when it comes to the christian story, which is just as imaginary, you are not?

Try, just for a moment, to look at christianity with the same amount of healthy skepticism that you used when approaching the stories of Santa, joseph smith and mohammed. Use your common sense to ask some very simple questions of yourself:

Is there any physical evidence that jesus existed? - No. He left no trace. His body "ascended into heaven." He wrote nothing down. None of his "miracles" left any permanent evidence. There is, literally, nothing.

Is there any reason to believe that jesus actually performed these miracles, or that he rose from the dead, or that he ascended into heaven? - There is no more of a reason to believe this than there is to believe that joseph smith found the golden plates hidden in New York, or that mohammed rode on a magical winged horse to heaven. Probably less of a reason, given that the record of jesus' life is 2,000 years old, while that of joseph smith is less than 200 years old.

You mean to tell me that I am supposed to believe this story of jesus, and there is no proof or evidence to go by beyond a few attestations in the new testament of a bible that is provably meaningless? - Yes, you are supposed to believe it. You are supposed to take it on "faith."
No one (besides little kids) believes in Santa Claus. No one outside the mormon church believes joseph smith's story. No one outside the muslim faith believes the story of mohammed and gabriel and the winged horse. No one outside the christian faith believes in jesus' divinity, miracles, resurrection, etc.
Therefore, the question I would ask you to consider right now is simple: Why is it that human beings can detect fairy tales with complete certainty when those fairy tales come from other faiths, but they cannot detect the fairy tales that underpin their own faith? Why do they believe their chosen fairy tale with unrelenting passion and reject the others as nonsense? For example:

christians know that when the Egyptians built gigantic pyramids and mummified the bodies of their pharaohs, that it was a total waste of time -- otherwise christians would build pyramids.

christians know that when the aztecs carved the heart out of a virgin and ate it, that it accomplished nothing -- otherwise christians would kill virgins.

christians know that when muslims face mecca to pray, that it is pointless -- otherwise christians would face mecca when they pray.

christians know that when jews keep meat and dairy products separate, that they are wasting their time -- otherwise the cheeseburger would not be an American obsession.

Yet, when christians look at their own religion, they are for some reason blind. Why? And no, it has nothing to do with the fact that the christian story is true. Your rational mind knows that with certainty, and so do billions of others.

This book, the holy binky, if you will let it, will control your free thinking.

If you are a christian who believes in the power of prayer, here is a very simple experiment that will show you something very interesting about your faith.

Take a coin out of your pocket. Now pray sincerely to Ra:

Dear Ra, almighty sun god, I am going to flip this ordinary coin 50 times, and I am asking you to cause it to land heads-side-up all 50 times. In Ra's name I pray, amen.
Now flip the coin. Chances are that you won't get past the fifth or sixth flip and the coin will land tails.
What does this mean? Most people would look at this data and conclude that Ra is imaginary. We prayed to Ra, and Ra did nothing. We can prove that Ra is imaginary (at least in the sense of prayer-answering ability) by using statistical analysis. If we flip the coin thousands of times, praying to Ra each time, we will find that the coin lands heads or tails in exact correlation with the normal laws of probability. Ra has absolutely no effect on the coin no matter how much we pray. Even if we find a thousand of Ra's most faithful believers and ask them to do the praying/flipping, the results will be the same. Therefore, as rational people, we conclude that Ra is imaginary. We look at Ra in the same way that we look at Leprechauns, Mermaids, Santa and so on. We know that people who believe in Ra are delusional.

Now I want you to try the experiment again, but this time I want you to pray to jesus christ instead of Ra. Pray sincerely to jesus like this:

Dear jesus, I know that you exist and I know that you hear and answer prayers as you promise in the bible. I am going to flip this ordinary coin 50 times, and I am asking you to cause it to land heads-side-up all 50 times. In jesus' name I pray, amen.
Now flip the coin. Once again, after the fifth or sixth flip, the coin will land tails.
If we flip the coin thousands of times, praying to jesus each time, we will find that the coin lands heads or tails in exact correlation with the normal laws of probability. It is not like there are two laws of probability -- one for christians who pray and the other for non-christians. There is only one law of probability because prayers have zero effect. jesus has no effect on our planet no matter how much we pray. We can prove that conclusively using statitical analysis.

If you believe in god, watch what is happening inside your mind right now. The data is absolutely identical in both experiments. With Ra you looked at the data rationally and concluded that Ra is imaginary. But with jesus... something else will happen. In your mind, you are already coming up with a thousand rationalizations to explain why jesus did not answer your prayers:

It is not his will
he doesn't have time
I didn't pray the right way
I am not worthy
I do not have enough faith
I cannot test the lord like this
It is not part of jesus' plan for me
And on and on and on...
One rationalization that you may find yourself developing is particularly interesting. You may say to yourself: "Well, of course jesus doesn"t answer me when I pray about a coin toss, because it is too trivial." Where did this rationalization come from? If you read what jesus says about prayer in the bible (see this proof), jesus does not ever say, "don't pray to me about nonsense" like coin tosses." jesus clearly says he will answer your prayers, and he puts no boundaries on what you may pray for. You invented this rationalization out of thin air.
You are an expert at creating rationalizations for jesus. The reason you are an expert is because jesus does not answer any of your prayers. The reason why jesus does not answer any of your prayers is because jesus and god are imaginary.

GAMEOVER 1:7--The number of scientific research papers that directly and indirectly confirm and support the theory of evolution is close to a million, but yet there is not one scientific paper that disproves the theory of evolution or in any way support creation myth. Theory of evolution is the grand unifying theory of biology, and it is 100% right. It is as much true as the fact that the Earth revolves around the sun. It is more than a theory. It is s fact. Evolution is the most rigorously proven scientific fact, with over 150 yrs of scrutiny and overwhelming evidence in 2013, while creation is a myth created by the ancient mind that didn't even know why there was a rainbow :)

christianity vs islam

It's deny equal human rights vs disrespecting human life, well played
Debate Round No. 3
Anti-atheist

Pro

You are ignoring everything I'm saying!
devient.genie

Con

PROOF OF EVOLUTION

Here of some of the well-tested methods of dating used in the study of early humans:

Potassium-argon dating, Argon-argon dating, Carbon-14 (or Radiocarbon), and Uranium series. All of these methods measure the amount of radioactive decay of chemical elements; the decay occurs in a consistent manner, like a clock, over long periods of time.
Thermo-luminescence, Optically stimulated luminescence, and Electron spin resonance. All of these methods measure the amount of electrons that get absorbed and trapped inside a rock or tooth over time.
Paleomagnetism. This method compares the direction of the magnetic particles in layers of sediment to the known worldwide shifts in Earth"s magnetic field, which have well-established dates using other dating methods.
Biochronology. Since animal species change over time, the fauna can be arranged from younger to older. At some sites, animal fossils can be dated precisely by one of these other methods. For sites that cannot be readily dated, the animal species found there can be compared to well-dated species from other sites. In this way, sites that do not have radioactive or other materials for dating can be given a reliable age estimate.
Molecular clock. This method compares the amount of genetic difference between living organisms and computes an age based on well-tested rates of genetic mutation over time. Since genetic material (like DNA) decays rapidly, the molecular clock method can"t date very old fossils. It"s mainly useful for figuring out how long ago living species or populations shared a common ancestor, based on their DNA.

DNA

Through news accounts and crime stories, we"re all familiar with the fact that the DNA in our cells reflects each individual"s unique identity and how closely related we are to one another. The same is true for the relationships among organisms. DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the molecule that makes up an organism"s genome in the nucleus of every cell. It consists of genes, which are the molecular codes for proteins " the building blocks of our tissues and their functions. It also consists of the molecular codes that regulate the output of genes " that is, the timing and degree of protein-making. DNA shapes how an organism grows up and the physiology of its blood, bone, and brains.

DNA is thus especially important in the study of evolution. The amount of difference in DNA is a test of the difference between one species and another " and thus how closely or distantly related they are.

While the genetic difference between individual humans today is minuscule " about 0.1%, on average " study of the same aspects of the chimpanzee genome indicates a difference of about 1.2%. The bonobo (Pan paniscus), which is the close cousin of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), differs from humans to the same degree. The DNA difference with gorillas, another of the African apes, is about 1.6%. Most importantly, chimpanzees, bonobos, and humans all show this same amount of difference from gorillas. A difference of 3.1% distinguishes us and the African apes from the Asian great ape, the orangutan. How do the monkeys stack up? All of the great apes and humans differ from rhesus monkeys, for example, by about 7% in their DNA.

Geneticists have come up with a variety of ways of calculating the percentages, which give different impressions about how similar chimpanzees and humans are. The 1.2% chimp-human distinction, for example, involves a measurement of only substitutions in the base building blocks of those genes that chimpanzees and humans share. A comparison of the entire genome, however, indicates that segments of DNA have also been deleted, duplicated over and over, or inserted from one part of the genome into another. When these differences are counted, there is an additional 4 to 5% distinction between the human and chimpanzee genomes.

No matter how the calculation is done, the big point still holds: humans, chimpanzees, and bonobos are more closely related to one another than either is to gorillas or any other primate. From the perspective of this powerful test of biological kinship, humans are not only related to the great apes " we are one. The DNA evidence leaves us with one of the greatest surprises in biology: the wall between human, on the one hand, and ape or animal, on the other, has been breached. The human evolutionary tree is embedded within the great apes.

The strong similarities between humans and the African great apes led Charles Darwin in 1871 to predict that Africa was the likely place where the human lineage branched off from other animals " that is, the place where the common ancestor of chimpanzees, humans, and gorillas once lived. The DNA evidence shows an amazing confirmation of this daring prediction. The African great apes, including humans, have a closer kinship bond with one another than the African apes have with orangutans or other primates. Hardly ever has a scientific prediction so bold, so "out there" for its time, been upheld as the one made in 1871 " that human evolution began in Africa.

The DNA evidence informs this conclusion, and the fossils do, too. Even though Europe and Asia were scoured for early human fossils long before Africa was even thought of, ongoing fossil discoveries confirm that the first 4 million years or so of human evolutionary history took place exclusively on the African continent. It is there that the search continues for fossils at or near the branching point of the chimpanzee and human lineages from our last common ancestor.

Primate Family Tree

Due to billions of years of evolution, humans share genes with all living organisms. The percentage of genes or DNA that organisms share records their similarities. We share more genes with organisms that are more closely related to us.

Humans belong to the biological group known as Primates, and are classified with the great apes, one of the major groups of the primate evolutionary tree. Besides similarities in anatomy and behavior, our close biological kinship with other primate species is indicated by DNA evidence. It confirms that our closest living biological relatives are chimpanzees and bonobos, with whom we share many traits. But we did not evolve directly from any primates living today.

DNA also shows that our species and chimpanzees diverged from a common ancestor species that lived between 8 and 6 million years ago. The last common ancestor of monkeys and apes lived about 25 million years ago.

While people used to think that there was a single line of human species, with one evolving after the other in an inevitable march towards modern humans, we now know this is not the case. Like most other mammals, we are part of a large and diverse family tree. Fossil discoveries show that the human family tree has many more branches and deeper roots than we knew about even a couple of decades ago. In fact, the number of branches our evolutionary tree, and also the length of time, has nearly doubled since the famed "Lucy" fossil skeleton was discovered in 1974!

There were periods in the past when three or four early human species lived at the same time, even in the same place. We " Homo sapiens " are now the sole surviving species in this once diverse family tree.

While the existence of a human evolutionary family tree is not in question, its size and shape - the number of branches representing different genera and species, and the connections among them " are much debated by researchers and further confounded by a fossil record that only offers fragmented look at the ancient past. The debates are sometimes perceived as uncertainty about evolution, but that is far from the case. The debates concern the precise evolutionary relationships - essentially, "who is related to whom, and how."

CURES 1:2--"Thinking", if it doesn't cure you of your religion, you're not doing it right :)
Debate Round No. 4
Anti-atheist

Pro

This has nothing to do with evolution! Vote Pro Con is just being a twit.
devient.genie

Con

Laws from the courts of all government level, should Never be concerned with any one persons beliefs, your belief to put restrictions on African Americans, will Not be tolerated just because you defend denying human rights by calling yourself the aryan nation and justifying your beliefs from scripture written 2000 yrs ago by any old fashioned 1st century dork, born with obviously a lower level of conciousness, look at their website, it is covered in biblical justification.

So that is why your belief to put restrictions on Gay Americans, should Not be tolerated just because you defend denying human rights by calling yourself a christian nation and justifying your beliefs from scripture written 2000 yrs ago by any old fashioned 1st century dork, born with obviously a lower level of consciousness, look at their website, it is covered in biblical justification

A simple shift in consciousness figures out that slavery is absurd, as is any form of racism and denying women the right to vote. Growing up mentally, and judging beliefs that are Not beneficial to an advanced consciousness is how mankind becomes a better mankind.

So quit running around claiming we shouldnt judge peoples religious beliefs, calling a set of beliefs a religion and putting a shield of humility up to protect you from criticism, is a good way to retard the growth of human consciousness in your child and confuse them with your lunacy so the gay children commit suicide out of fear, shame and confusion created by "good religious folk" Hows your kids doing in school being raised with religious poison? The only way mankind evolves is when our children are raised with current understandings.

Our current understandings admonished slavery, all racism and yet, denying human rights to gay americans is easily justified form the same lunacy the aryans justify their beliefs. Stuff gets done all the time when we do judge beliefs and challenge beliefs and always look for understandings that are beneficial to mankind.

Science is the same way. It is not concerned with your beliefs. Your belief that the earth is flat wont change the sphere. Your belief that the sun revolves around the earth, wont change the Heliocentric Theorys explanation that we revolve around the sun.

Your beliefs that a god breathed into adams nostrils to create mankind, wont change the Theory of evolutions explanations that we evolved by natural selection over billions of years. Get it, beliefs are for children, understandings are for Big Kids. Grow up and take your children to museums and science centers on the weekend, the world can always use another genius, and mankind will always advance faster and create miralcle cures when more education and money is donated in the name of genius, instead of jesus for miracles :)

You could have all the scientific understandings, all the evidence, understanding and knowledge in the world, and the more you know and the longer you stay religious, the longer that knowledge is just wasted wisdom :)

Got Knowledge?

Its not what you got, its what you do with it :)

That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."
-Christopher Hitchens

CaptainObvious 10:57--There is a difference between the reason for everything and a slave supporting sexist homophobe with a propensity to be concerned with what humans do naked with another consenting adult human. The biblical god is a petty bully, and so is the god of the quran, the reason for everything is currently undefined and thats Ok :)

There are thousands and thousands of people who are evidence that reading the bible with a skeptical, open, inquisitive mind will produce an Intellectual Advocate.
There are many who were all once believers in christianity.
All decided to study the bible to become much better christians.
All had young inquiring and a little skeptical minds.
All realized what they were reading was inconsistent, irrational and poorly devised.
All gained the impression from the very first chapter in genesis that the god of the bible is a completely narcissistic megalomaniac which performed gross malevolence throught the bible.
They had hoped to find a good benevolent god, no such god existed within the bible.
They used to praise joshua as children, but realized after reading the bible that he was a murderous war criminal, the equivalent of saddam hussein, massacred innocents in his quest for glory which also made the god giving the orders another malevolence badge.
There are so many problems within the bible that it made them wonder why their parents wanted them to believe in it in the first place.

All are now Intellectual Advocates who can never return to religious belief ever.

The god of the bible is too idiotic, narcissistic and malevolent to be real.

You need to understand that it is fact, that in the early fourth century the philosopher Sopatros was executed on demand of christian authorities. The world famous female philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria was torn to pieces with glass fragments by a hysterical christian mob led by a christian minister named peter, in a church, in 415. You may want to do your own research, and draw your own conclusions and understandings.

Just because someone is good at proliferating tripe and misunderstandings thru creationist illogical thinking, proves nothing other than logic, reason, and evidence are Not necessary in a delusional mind when it comes to answers concerning the universe and life . I didnt read your debate con, because no matter how you slice it, he cant make it to each house in one night using flying reindeer, oh wait, I got my fairy tales mixed up, your not advocating santa, youre advocating the belief that there is a being that keeps track of who is naughty or nice, without a sleigh :)

Bringing up abiogenesis and micro and macro arguments against the validity of evolution proves nothing. Sega Genesis has as much to do with evolution as abiogenesis, and Micro Machines have as much to do with evolutions validity as the delusional misunderstandings of micro and macro affect evolutions validity :)

Science is Not a belief system. Science demands evidence, beliefs only demand faith :)

I can get a good look at a T-Bone by sticking my head up a bulls a-s-s, but Id rather take the butchers word for it--Tommy Boy

I can get a good look at evolution by sticking my head in a microscope, but I'd rather take the Nobel Prize winning brilliant minded scientists word for it--Captain Obvious

Either that or the 95-99% of scientists who support evolution are the devil or involved in a huge conspiracy. The 1-5%, depending on the source, believe the earth was created by a divine sex monitor with a propensity to support human slavery :)

There's a reason the words genius, and brilliant minded dont get thrown around in regards to a high level priest, pastor or other religious leader, however, genius and brilliant minded in regards to a high level scientist go together quite well :)

Any human on the planet with half a brain understands that the biblical pansy many people call a god is against homosexuality.

You can twist things around and split hairs until youre blue in the face or a petty homophobe comes down from the clouds, but if he wont let any homosexuals into his fairy tale kingdom, he is going to have to monitor peoples sex lives to see who is gay and who is not.

Hey religious kids, what is it about zeus that is so ridiculous that a divine homophobic sex monitor is somehow more likely?

Get a clue kids, without the pages containing slavery, barbarism, sexism, homophobia, who to kill and why, what foods we are allowed to eat and not allowed to eat, all acts of violence or harm, or threats of violence and harm, dragons and other crazy creatures, plus remove all the plagarism from other nonsense thruought time, the bible would be as thick as a dime :)

RIDDLES 8:36--christiasn vs islam, who is dumber? mormon :)
Debate Round No. 5
31 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by devient.genie 3 years ago
devient.genie
Sweetbreeze, I dont take these debates seriously. I dont listen to what humans tell me to do if they worship a murderer :)

The voting is a joke. There are vote bombs, there are nothing but little kids who whine and cry and snitch to the site about being made fun of here.

So I disrespect religitards :)

If everyone disrespected religion like they disrespect the KKK, this would be a better world.

There are plenty of stupid people who worship a murderer, they need reminded that murder worship is disgusting :)
Posted by sweetbreeze 3 years ago
sweetbreeze
devient.genie, R1 was for acceptance only. You put your argument straight there!
Posted by devient.genie 3 years ago
devient.genie
hereiam2005, and when you cut and paste something it automatically makes it untrue and makes god real.

As a matter of fact, anytime science is wrong, it automatically makes jesus my savior :)

DeathGames 22:2--Take your son, your only son isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of moriah, and offer him there as a burnt-offering on one of the mountains that I shall show you." (genesis 22:2)

I love people who are willing to kill their children. Killing your child is awesome, it totally proves love, everyone should kill at least one child so they can really really know what love is all about :)

DevientGenie 3:45--Religion is a crime against human intelligence. The Genie is a Vigilante against such criminal activity :)
Posted by hereiam2005 3 years ago
hereiam2005
Con copy and pasted from here
http://godisimaginary.com...
Posted by devient.genie 3 years ago
devient.genie
alberto, how is advocating intellectual honesty biased?

CheckMate 1:11--The precious new testament in "I corinthians 11" is sexist and there are another hundred new testament verses that are mentally sick in some way. A real ideal man in the 21st century has the confidence and worthiness, that control and misogyny are viewed as childish and insecure.

Interesting isnt it that todays best men are smarter than yesterdays god? Thats because yesterdays god was written by yesterdays man. Tomorrows man is determined in part by todays man.

Men of logic and reason have always advanced mankind further than men who believe in superstition. Science is a tool we use to discover, this tool uses logic and reason, and probability, thru the scientific method.

A hammer is a tool we use in construction, this simple tool uses a heavy metal head. Hammers arent as good as science at curing disease, but they are still both tools, one just more advanced. Lifetime Construction workers are more adept at using a hammer than a lifetime quilter, scientists are more adept at explaining the universe and life thru the tool called science better than any priest or pastor :)

CheckMate 6:25--Original sin? The only way it can carry the word original, is in the one of a kind definition of using the word "original" There is no equal in lunacy, original sin is definitely, by definition, one of a kind lunacy, the lunacy that humans are born inherently bad with sin is a very original way to be delusional so original, ironically it is now in fact unoriginal to be religious, there are churches everywhere to prove the unoriginality of religious indoctrination available for our childrens minds :)

Religious Intellect: What about objective moral values, where do those come from?

Morality comes from each societies understanding of common sense. Thats not a tough question to answer. If you need a book to teach you common sense, you dont impress me much.
Posted by Albert 3 years ago
Albert
Please go on forever, i enjoy biased secular comments. Do you know what parables and justified condemnation is? Or maybe unrepentant killers deserve the same as Jesus?

....waits for 2 seconds to watch 4 essays posted by Devient.genie in reply....laughs because noone reads it.
Posted by devient.genie 3 years ago
devient.genie
Thats just one book of matthew, we could go forever,with other books, but you get the point.

Pansies use violence and threats because they are too incompetent to come up with a better idea :)
Posted by devient.genie 3 years ago
devient.genie
apple, thanks for asking. Please remain seated until ride comes to a complete stop :)

Matthew

Those who bear bad fruit will be cut down and burned "with unquenchable fire." 3:10, 12

Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn't the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. 5:17

Jesus recommends that to avoid sin we cut off our hands and pluck out our eyes. This advice is given immediately after he says that anyone who looks with lust at any women commits adultery. 5:29-30

Jesus says that most people will go to hell. 7:13-14

Those who fail to bear "good fruit" will be "hewn down, and cast into the fire." 7:19

"The children of the kingdom [the Jews] shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 8:12

Jesus tells a man who had just lost his father: "Let the dead bury the dead." 8:21

Jesus sends some devils into a herd of pigs, causing them to run off a cliff and drown in the waters below. 8:32

Cities that neither "receive" the disciples nor "hear" their words will be destroyed by God. It will be worse for them than for Sodom and Gomorrah. And you know what God supposedly did to those poor folks (see Gen 19:24). 10:14-15

Families will be torn apart because of Jesus (this is one of the few "prophecies" in the Bible that has actually come true). "Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death." 10:21

Jesus says that we should fear God who is willing and "able to destroy both soul and body in hell." 10:28
Jesus says that he has come to destroy families by making family members hate each other. He has "come not to send peace, but a sword." 10:34-36

Jesus condemns entire cities to dreadful deaths and to the eternal torment of hell because they didn't care for his preaching. 11:20-24
Posted by Apple.Z 3 years ago
Apple.Z
con, tell me how god and Jesus were cruel. They did what they had to do for the people. I think you are delusional
Posted by devient.genie 3 years ago
devient.genie
Meanwhile, Schweitzer"s research has been hijacked by "young earth" creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn"t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of course, it"s not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists.

But when creationists misrepresent Schweitzer"s data, she takes it personally: she describes herself as "a complete and total Christian." On a shelf in her office is a plaque bearing an Old Testament verse: "For I know the plans I have for you," declares the Lord, "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future."

Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com...

She is proof that "book smarts" alone cannot protect you from religious dogma, the poison infects our instinctual desires, and a weak instinct will become infected :)
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Nimbus328 3 years ago
Nimbus328
Anti-atheistdevient.genieTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro: Jesus is now in Quantum Mechanics? Con: Don't ignore your opponent in debate.
Vote Placed by Magic8000 3 years ago
Magic8000
Anti-atheistdevient.genieTied
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 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: It's OK to make arguments. It's not OK to ignore arguments
Vote Placed by jh1234l 3 years ago
jh1234l
Anti-atheistdevient.genieTied
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 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 to pro because con posted in r1 when it is acceptance only. Arguments to pro:con could have done a lot better by including factors such as gravity on pro's induction argument, which con did not respond to. Sources to con because he is the only one to use them, although they were only two bible quotes.