The Instigator
physicsmajor1
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
annatheotterpop
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Is creationism a viable model of origins in today's modern science?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/12/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 604 times Debate No: 45706
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

physicsmajor1

Con

I say no, because all of creationism is based on extraordinary claims that have no evidence whatsoever. If someone gave physical evidence for creation, than science would be forever changed, however, no one can give any proof beyond the bible for creationism. As where evolution has a multitude of observational and physical evidence backing it up.
annatheotterpop

Pro

I believe it creation is a viable model. What is this picture? http://www.google.com...

Is it the rock hard evidence that evolution is viable? No of course not! This is a cartoon picture of monkeys, apes, and men!
In order to prove creation wrong you must first prove other methods right.

Debate Round No. 1
physicsmajor1

Con

physicsmajor1 forfeited this round.
annatheotterpop

Pro

annatheotterpop forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
physicsmajor1

Con

physicsmajor1 forfeited this round.
annatheotterpop

Pro

annatheotterpop forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by physicsmajor1 3 years ago
physicsmajor1
Yes, I do realize that there was a debate exactly like this between Bill Nye and Ken Ham, I watched it as a matter of fact. I simply wished to know other's opinions on the subject.
Posted by RowanM 3 years ago
RowanM
You realize Bill Nye and Ken Ham had this exact debate about a week ago, right?
Posted by jrelkins 3 years ago
jrelkins
When regarding the origin of how things began it is solely a matter of faith because it cannot be proven. No one was there. That being said there are two basic "beliefs" regarding the origin of things. One being there was a designer who created this most complex universe of which we are a part.

The other being that somehow this universe began without purpose or design all by itself. Purely by chance the world is as it is. Somehow life just began. This flies in the face of reality and common sense. Science declares at every point of order and design and even to a beginning of which Creationist proclaim. Evolutionist also proclaim a Big Bang but have no explanation for how that came about.

So what do you believe? The world began as a direct act of a Creator or Designer or the world just randomly began without any outside impetus , all by itself. It is a matter of faith and not fact. I believe science is proving each and every day that this world could not exist apart from a creator. I just don't have enough faith to believe in a cosmic accident. That this complex world is a random act in history past of no particular origin. It just happened.
No votes have been placed for this debate.