The Instigator
RandRichter
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points
The Contender
CommunistDog
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Is Creationism still a viable theory in today modern scientific world

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...
RandRichter
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/22/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 416 times Debate No: 73951
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

RandRichter

Con

He/she who accepts this challenge will be arguing that creationism is still a viable theory of origins in today's modern scientific world. I will do my best to prove that it is not. This is the first debate I am creating so let's make it a good one.
CommunistDog

Pro

CHALLENGE ACCEPTED! Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
RandRichter

Con

Thank you for accepting my challenge and I look forward to your thoughts.

I want to start by listing some of the notions you must accept as fact if we are to consider creationism to be a viable theory of origins.

1. The bible is to be interpreted literally, as true historical fact and most incredibly the word of god.
2. The earth is roughly 6,000 years old
3. Adam and Eve were the first human beings, roughly 6,000 years ago
4. There was a global flood that wiped out all living organisms besides those aboard the supposed arc.
5. This arc was built by Noah with help from his family.
6. Upon this arc lived two "kinds" of every animal, that represents the ancestors of all animals on the planet today.
7. These animals migrated from the Middle East to all corners of the globe.
8.they evolved at such a rate to produce the huge number of varying species we see today and then they stopped evolving at that rate for reasons unknown


I first ask that you provide any substantiated evidence for these 8 notions to back up your world view. Please number them accordingly to avoid any confusion. You are welcome to bring any other points you may have as well the structure of the debate is how we make it, so do of feel constricted. Also you may attack Evolution in your statements but you must know that this debate is not about disproving evolution, so that will not further your cause. The burden of proof is very high for your side in proving that creationism is still viable as it claims to know exactly and beyond a doubt the origins of man, and animals.
Good luck and let's have some fun.
CommunistDog

Pro

CommunistDog forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
RandRichter

Con

RandRichter forfeited this round.
CommunistDog

Pro

CommunistDog forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
RandRichter

Con

RandRichter forfeited this round.
CommunistDog

Pro

CommunistDog forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by RandRichter 2 years ago
RandRichter
The wording of the question is to imply the difficulty of believing creationism as a viable theory given the amount of evidence to the contrary we no have. It is not the first story we have created to explain the origins, and it won't be the last. Nevertheless in America there are religious lobbies trying to have creationism taught in our schools. Some are winning this fight. The debate is about if a theory that many people believe is still viable today. Regardless of what you want to call this world, postmodern, modern, all irrelevant to the debate.
Posted by Asburnu 2 years ago
Asburnu
Written records in China and India date back beyond 10,000 B.C. Adam and Eve are newcomers, sorry.
Posted by kingfisher 2 years ago
kingfisher
The question is whether we live in a modern scientific period - or postmodern period. It would also be important if creationism was believed by everyone if there was a pre scientific period
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by triangle.128k 2 years ago
triangle.128k
RandRichterCommunistDogTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: One less forfeit
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 2 years ago
Midnight1131
RandRichterCommunistDogTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I take back my vote, I realize that Con made no arguments in their 2nd round. So therefore it's a tie.