The Instigator
polka-dots323
Pro (for)
Losing
27 Points
The Contender
brittwaller
Con (against)
Winning
63 Points

God is real. Big Bang and evolution did not occur.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/11/2008 Category: Science
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,093 times Debate No: 2551
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (21)
Votes (28)

 

polka-dots323

Pro

You told me to challenge you to a debate, so here it is... This topic is the topic of God. I would like you to understand that no matter how much "scientific things" you throw at me, you will not change my strong conviction in God. Although, I will never change my mind in my belief of God, I will debate the topic. Also, I would love to hear about your thoughts on the Big Bang and evolution. So far, none of my opponents have given an answer to my questions I have about the two theories. They have twisted the question and yet again tried to question my beliefs and faith. I hope that you will answer these questions directly. Also, I want to add that the type of evolution I am referring to is not the adaptations species may make to fit the conditions of their habitats, but evolution meaning that all animals share a common ancestor.
brittwaller

Con

Well, I'll try to the best of my ability to write in a clear and concise manner, and answer your questions in a straightforward way. It isn't in my purview to question your beliefs or faith; however, you should not be offended when I speak frankly.

I want us to understand each other, so I need you to define "God," please. I cannot argue for or against the existence of such a vague term.

Back to you.
Debate Round No. 1
polka-dots323

Pro

OKay, I would like you to explain to me why you believe that God doesn't exist and why you believe the big bang and evolution (not adaptations, but creating humans and how we evolved from the same ancestors as apes, etc.) happened. PLease do not say that there is scientific facts to prove it, please state those facts. :)
brittwaller

Con

For what it's worth... here we go.

"OKay, I would like you to explain to me why you believe that God doesn't exist and why you believe the big bang and evolution (not adaptations, but creating humans and how we evolved from the same ancestors as apes, etc.) happened."

-First, I did not say that I believe god does not exist or that I believe that the Big Bang and evolution did happen. Don't put words in my mouth and I will kindly reciprocate.

Second, my personal beliefs are irrelevant. This is a debate, not a mutual interview. As far as you know, this is simply a position I am arguing against. I'm sorry if you were hoping for something different; a debate is (ideally) judged on who has the stronger argument for their position, not on if the debater believes what he writes is the "truth." As a tip to you, because you are new but obviously eager, I ask you to consider these points in this and all future debates you may have on this site. As a philosopher, I might be interested in discussing my personal metaphysic with you, but outside of the context of debate, and certainly only after the debate is over. Do not consider this a mark of insincerity - that's just the way it works.

Third, you have posited two positions: 1)God is real, and 2)[The] Big Bang and evolution did not occur, and have provided arguments in favor of neither. Again, the burden of proof is on you, and you haven't provided anything for me to either concede or refute. You must prove your statements; I don't have to prove the opposite, only create reasonable doubt as to their validity. You have asked questions, not written a clear and coherent argument for your positions.

Fourth, you wrote, "So far, none of my opponents have given an answer to my questions I have about the two theories. They have twisted the question and yet again tried to question my beliefs and faith." I would have to disagree, especially in the case of Kleptin. He was more than fair. He answered all of your questions directly and courteously. He was more courteous and patient with you than most might be, I would venture to say. Disagreeing with you and providing superior arguments is not twisting the question, or questioning or attacking your beliefs and faith. You have made it abundantly clear that you believe in god and not the Big Bang or evolution. That is not in question; what is in question is the validity of those beliefs and faith. Again, it's a debate that you instigated - what did you expect?

Fifth, when I asked you for a clarification of the definition of "god," I was trying to do you a favor. Your response did not help. Even you must admit that the "Christian God" is a vague concept, as it varies from one denomination to another, as well as from one individual to another. Christendom is far from a unified ideology, or even a unified and consistent theology for that matter.

Sixth, there is only "evolution." Adaptation over time and descent from a common ancestor are one in the same. To discuss one without the other is ridiculous.

-Prime arguments against the reality of "god," which is still a very loose term here. (Unless you want me to define "god" as my goldfish "God," in which case I would concede that god is real and thank you for your enthusiastic, if somewhat strange, affirmation of its existence and your faith in it?)

1. Lack of empirical evidence. See Ockham's Razor.
2. Lack of logical arguments that support the reality of god.
3. The errancy and inconsistency of documents, doctrines, and dogma purporting to be either the word or the will of god.
4. The problem of pain, and similarly, the brutality of the world in general.
5. In Christianity, the gruesomeness and immorality of the "god" character, especially in the Old Testament.

-Prime arguments that the Big Bang occurred

1. The universe is expanding.
2. By observing the universe today, astronomers, cosmologists, and physicists can gauge a relatively accurate age for the universe, around 15 billion years, give or take.
3. By having this knowledge, scientists can somewhat effectively reverse-engineer how the universe came to be as it is today. When they go back far enough, they find that the universe began as a singularity with an excessive amount of mass that exploded.

Prime argument that Evolution occurred

1. The over-abundance of empirical evidence that all organisms descended from a common ancestor: the fossil record, similarities and differences in DNA, "etc."
American biologist Douglas J. Futuyma sums up eloquently: "The theory of evolution is a body of interconnected statements about natural selection and the other processes that are thought to cause evolution, just as the atomic theory of chemistry and the Newtonian theory of mechanics are bodies of statements that describe causes of chemical and physical phenomena. In contrast, the statement that organisms have descended with modifications from common ancestors - the historical reality of evolution - is not a theory. It is a fact, as fully as the fact of the earth's revolution about the sun. Like the heliocentric solar system, evolution began as a hypothesis, and achieved 'facthood' as the evidence in its favor became so strong that no knowledgeable and unbiased person could deny its reality. No biologist today would think of submitting a paper entitled 'New evidence for evolution;' it simply has not been an issue for a century."

-As for abiogenesis, there isn't quite a consensus in the scientific community, but there are many workable models, including but not limited to: the RNA-world hypothesis, iron-sulfur world hypothesis, autocatalysis, clay theory, the polyphosphate model, and the PAH-world hypothesis.

That's all for now. I eagerly await your refutations and your arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
polka-dots323

Pro

polka-dots323 forfeited this round.
brittwaller

Con

So much for Round 3, I suppose. The ball is still in your court. 100 characters 100 characters 100 characters.
Debate Round No. 3
polka-dots323

Pro

polka-dots323 forfeited this round.
brittwaller

Con

My opponent has defended nothing coherently and refuted nothing at all. Need more be said?

Feel free to ask your questions in the comments section if you are still interested, polka-dots.
Debate Round No. 4
21 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
That's all for now. If I remember, I'll get to your other debates some other time. Later.
Posted by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
CONDUCT: As mentioned in a previous comment section, I dislike it when the instigator doesn't actually provide an argument in the first round and will automatically vote against him/her on the matter of conduct when he/she does this. This vote goes to CON. That and PRO forfeited.

SPELLING AND GRAMMAR: See my forfeit policy.

Convincing arguments: PRO asks CON to explain how God isn't real and how the Big Bang and evolution occurred. After this, we don't hear from PRO. Thus, CON wins on this department.

Reliable sources: None were brought up. This is a tie.
Posted by CP 9 years ago
CP
Always a funny debate with the same entertaining outcome every time.
Posted by das_kapitel 9 years ago
das_kapitel
Polka dot, although I agree with you in the fact that God created the universe and that the big bang never occurred, this is a site used for debating, and since you failed to give any real debatable material, I decided to vote CON in this matter.
Posted by khaylitsa 9 years ago
khaylitsa
in responce to you "we feel him in our everyday lives" how can you explain the fact that other religions feel the same? every one of them 'feels god' and evey one says that their book did not write its elf. unless all religions are true because of this that is a VERY faulty anser.
Posted by brittwaller 9 years ago
brittwaller
Please stop commenting in this way for your sake. You are now preaching and making yourself look bad.

"Christians (and most religions for that matter) do not need "proof" that God exists."

That's the problem, dots:)
Posted by polka-dots323 9 years ago
polka-dots323
I believe in God. People who believe in God have a relationship with him and are able to see Him working in their everyday lives. I think that it is quite silly to believe that we formed just becuase conditions were right. Christians (and most religions for that matter) do not need "proof" that God exists becuase again, we experience Him in our everyday lives. When you read the Bible and pray, you feel a connection to Him. How do you explain the creation of the Bible? The people did not wake up one morning and say "I am going to create the idea of God and write a chapter in the book which shall be called the Bible." My God is real and the truth.
Posted by polka-dots323 9 years ago
polka-dots323
I do not believe that you answered them in detail. You, denyed all of them without much detail at all.
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
"I would like you to explain this to me.
Evolution:
(Please explain in detail your rebuts)"

This looks familiar.

"Besides, Kleptin handled all of your "Evidence Points" below in your debate with him."

Ahhh yes, that's where I've seen them before. You must have skipped reading the rest of the debate since my post ended it. Here's something to make sure you don't use that particular source again.

http://www.geocities.com...
http://members.aol.com...

These TWO sites are devoted specifically to debunking your ONE. Just so you know, any site on the internet with proofs against evolution are immediately countered by at least 2 other sites responding specifically to that site. So citing websites is not a good idea.
Posted by khaylitsa 9 years ago
khaylitsa
this confuses me why u should ever think that god exists. you have no place that u can claim it came from so it obviosly came from the human imagonation. if this *god u r refering to exists then y have there been no solid accounts of him existing? this is just one big way of explaining things. people have done this time and time agian thu out history, the greeks, the indeans, the native americans and so on. what u choose to belive in, namly this *god* has only been created to describe things, to make people obay a central athourity and to put down crime rates. i personally belive in the things that can be proven. the big bang is a THEORY that means for your information that there is proof that this may be the anser but it is not certen. now if you can kindly give an reason to y i am wrong please do.
28 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
polka-dots323brittwallerTied
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 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
polka-dots323brittwallerTied
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 
Vote Placed by Jamcke 9 years ago
Jamcke
polka-dots323brittwallerTied
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 
Vote Placed by Mattowander 9 years ago
Mattowander
polka-dots323brittwallerTied
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 
Vote Placed by Rich_Ruiz 9 years ago
Rich_Ruiz
polka-dots323brittwallerTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by brian_eggleston 9 years ago
brian_eggleston
polka-dots323brittwallerTied
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 
Vote Placed by solo 9 years ago
solo
polka-dots323brittwallerTied
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 
Vote Placed by Kmille11014 9 years ago
Kmille11014
polka-dots323brittwallerTied
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 
Vote Placed by jbg 9 years ago
jbg
polka-dots323brittwallerTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by rawritsmichelle 9 years ago
rawritsmichelle
polka-dots323brittwallerTied
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:30