The Instigator
ThinkingWithLogic
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Griftor05
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Is Evolution a more viable source of history than Creationism

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/24/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 377 times Debate No: 57124
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

ThinkingWithLogic

Pro

First off, I would like to keep this as professional as possible. But Science has proved that Evolution is the more viable source. Take Noah's Ark for example, it said that a man gathered 7,000 species of animals, and then put them on a boat for survival, well take the Kangaroo for example, it is indigenous to Australia, and if Noah's Ark took place the Middle East, shouldn't there be fossils of kangaroos anywhere in that 6,000 mile span? But there isn't.
Griftor05

Con

I just have one word. Pangea. That explains how they all got there. But Pangea was so long ago, you say. But what if science got the age of the Earth wrong? Everything we think happened, actually happened a lot quicker. And then, for some unfathomable reason, it began to slow down. The flooding of the Earth could have happened right when the continents began to break apart and rearrange. And just because we have models for how the tectonic plates shifted, doesn't mean it actually happened that way. The "middle-east" could have been just "the middle" at that point. And with God somehow contacting two of every animal on the planet (which we know happened, since no excess of any species showed up), he would have taken care of them on the journey there (what did he care about strange food popping up all over the place? He was about to drown everyone!)

Anyway, I'll hand that back to you, make of it what you will.
Debate Round No. 1
ThinkingWithLogic

Pro

ThinkingWithLogic forfeited this round.
Griftor05

Con

Griftor05 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
ThinkingWithLogic

Pro

ThinkingWithLogic forfeited this round.
Griftor05

Con

Griftor05 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by WileyC1949 2 years ago
WileyC1949
First of neither evolution nor creationism is a "source" for history. Nor are they a "source" for science. Science is not history it is science. Certainly by looking at history we can trace the development of science, and certainly scientific invention has had a profound effect upon history, but they are two separate thing s.

Secondly say you want to talk about evolution and Creationism, but then you divert to the story of Noah and the Ark. That story has absolutely nothing to do with Creationism. Please select what your topic is going to be.

Third you have to define what you mean by Creationism. If you are talking about an instantaneous Creation that is one thing, but the vast majority of Christian do not believe that, but they still believe that everything came to be through God. There is no conflict with most Christians as most accept both. Most believe that God guided the development of the different species by use of a sort of evolutionary process.

Finally the theory of evolution has been coming under attack more and more by secular scientists. Darwin himself said the the fact of the Cambrian Explosion could very well defeat his theory of Natural Selection.
Posted by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
*aren't
No votes have been placed for this debate.