The Instigator
suriaguru
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
BillBonJovi
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

No theory qualifies to be a theory of evolution

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: 1/6/2011 Category: Science
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 931 times Debate No: 14291
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

suriaguru

Pro

Is there any theory which explains the origin of:
1. divisibility,
2. comparability,
3. connectivity,
4. sensitivity,
5. transformability,
6. substitutability, and
7. satisfiability?

Any theory which cannot explain the origin of divisibility, comparability, connectivity, sensitivity, transformability, substitutability, and satisfiability does not qualify to be a theory of evolution!
BillBonJovi

Con

Obviously so many living organisms in the history of the Earth have had happenings related to divisibility, comparability, connectivity, sensitivity, transformability, substitutability and satisfiability. That in general is "evolution". [1]

I'll explain how it can very well qualify to be a theory of evolution.

Evolution is usually defined simply as changes in trait or gene frequency in a population of organisms from one generation to the next. However, evolution is often used to include the following additional claims:

1.Differences in trait composition between isolated populations over many generations may result in the origin of new species.
2.All living organisms alive today have descended from a common ancestor (or ancestral gene pool).

Biological evolution may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion of different alleles within a population (such as those determining blood types) to the successive alterations that led from the earliest proto-organism to snails, bees, giraffes, and dandelions. [2]

The term "evolution", especially when referred to as a "theory", is also used more broadly to incorporate processes such as natural selection and genetic drift.

In short, claims 1 and 2 can qualify to be a theory of the origin of the divisibility, comparability, connectivity, sensitivity, transformability, substitutability and satisfiability.

Sources:
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
suriaguru

Pro

//Evolution is usually defined simply as changes in trait or gene frequency in a population of organisms from one generation to the next.//
1. Isn't divisibility a trait of organisms?
2. Isn't comparability a trait of organisms?
3. Isn't connectivity a trait of organisms?
4. Isn't sensitivity a trait of organisms?
5. Isn't transformability a trait of organisms?
6. Isn't substitutability a trait of organisms?
7. Isn't satisfiability a trait of organisms?

What is the origin of divisibility?
What is the origin of comparability?
What is the origin of connectivity?
What is the origin of sensitivity?
What is the origin of transformability?
What is the origin of susbtitutability?
What is the origin of satisfiability?

Is there any theory which explain the orgin of divisibility?....
Can a theory which cannot explain the origin of divisibility be called as theory of evolution?
Can there be evolution in the absence of divisibility?
BillBonJovi

Con

Well it appears PRO has extended my own argument...

For example he kept repeating questions like "Isn't divisibility a trait of organisms?" and "Isn't comparability a trait of organisms?" with "a trait of organisms".

PRO basically conceded that "a trait of organisms" is indeed a theory which explain the origin of divisibility, comparability, connectivity, sensitivity, transformability, substitutability and satisfiability.

PRO mysteriously quoted a sentence of mine that I made in the first round which was:
"Evolution is usually defined simply as changes in trait or gene frequency in a population of organisms from one generation to the next."
And that does indeed qualify to be a theory of evolution.

I will repeat the 2 claims I said in my first round which are that:

1. Differences in trait composition between isolated populations over many generations may result in the origin of new species. (for example we humans feel love, many other living organisms do not).
2. All living organisms alive today have descended from a common ancestor (or ancestral gene pool).

Overall I have explained (and PRO has conceded) that there are theories which CAN explain the origin of divisibility, comparability, connectivity, sensitivity, transformability, substitutability, and satisfiability, and do qualify to be a theory of evolution.
Debate Round No. 2
suriaguru

Pro

//Differences in trait composition between isolated populations over many generations may result in the origin of new species. (for example we humans feel love, many other living organisms do not).
2. All living organisms alive today have descended from a common ancestor (or ancestral gene pool).//

How can the DIFFERENCES in trait composition between isolated populations over many generations may result in the origin of new species?

The problem is with 'DIFFERENCE'
The difference between population 'A' and population 'B' is neither in population 'A' nor in population 'B', but it is in between population 'A' and population 'B'. How can that which is neither in in population 'A' nor in population 'B' contribute to the origin of species?
BillBonJovi

Con

My opponent is not actually making arguments. He is repeating himself constantly and using no definite evidence to give evidence that there is no theory of evolution nor does he offer an alternate view of opinion. To me it seems like he is not taking this debate seriously.

I feel what I have explained in my previous rounds still stands correct and logical, as well as still qualify to be a theory of evolution.

Until my opponent can give definite evidence to give evidence that there is no theory of evolution or even offer an alternate view of opinion... for now I just say my argument is extended...
Debate Round No. 3
suriaguru

Pro

suriaguru forfeited this round.
BillBonJovi

Con

Argument extended.
Debate Round No. 4
suriaguru

Pro

suriaguru forfeited this round.
BillBonJovi

Con

Seeing as my opponent has not responded in the previous rounds I will just make a conclusion of the debate right now.

Conclusion of debate:

1.I have proved that there is indeed a theory explain the origin of divisibility, comparability, connectivity, sensitivity, transformability, substitutability and satisfiability, and explained how it can qualify to be a theory of evolution. The main information I used for my argument is that "Differences in trait composition between isolated populations over many generations may result in the origin of new species" as well as other facts I explained in Round

2.In Round 2 PRO basically conceded that my point about "a trait of organisms" is indeed a theory which explains the origin of divisibility, comparability, connectivity, sensitivity, transformability, substitutability and satisfiability.

3.In Round 3 it appeared that my opponent was not actually making arguments. He was repeating himself constantly and using no definite evidence to give evidence that there is no theory of evolution nor does he offer an alternate view of opinion. However I did provide evidence with the sources I used in Round 1. To me it seems like PRO was not taking this debate seriously (therefore he should be marked as Misconduct).

4.In Round 4 and 5 PRO forfeited the rounds meaning that he must have giving up on trying to win the debate because he may not have been able to counter argue my arguments.

Vote CON
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by ErikMontague 6 years ago
ErikMontague
I suppose I can combine the response I'm going to give on here with the response I was going to leave on your profile. The simple fact of the matter is, I don't like it when people vote unfairly. I don't believe you deserve my support for the simple matter that you don't vote fairly. The fact that you abstain from giving me an explanation as to why you voted the way you did, is: one, very bad judging on your part, and two, it gives you a lack of credibility. Debating is supposed to be a fruitful exercise of the mind, and a representation of the ideas of two different people. In addition, people are supposed to learn from their mistakes, and understand more about why people vote the way they do. By voting for your friend, and not even giving me any real constructive feedback as to why you voted against me, you inherently degrade the debate that I was in. I will not stand here and award you a victory, when you voted for your friend to appease her for whatever reason. A good judge doesn't let their personal life enter a debate, otherwise they shouldn't be judging. You should reconsider your conduct on this site, because not only have you tampered with the quality of one of my debates, you've done it to others as well.
Posted by BillBonJovi 6 years ago
BillBonJovi
un-voted. So now why dont you vote?
Posted by ErikMontague 6 years ago
ErikMontague
I would hope that you would un-vote for yourself.
Posted by BillBonJovi 6 years ago
BillBonJovi
Pro can vote for himself as well. and seeing as pro forfeited the last round that made the debate not show up on the main page for people to see, so I thought that I may as well vote for myself. I can always un-vote for myself.
Posted by ErikMontague 6 years ago
ErikMontague
Granted that the Pro did not respond in the last two rounds, I think it shows bad conduct for Con to completely vote for himself in every manner. It should be up to others, not to an individual actually arguing in the debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
suriaguruBillBonJoviTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Suriaguru did not take the debate seriously; he formulated no serious arguments, gave support to Con's case, and merely repeated phrase. Con contended that the theory of evolution can account for what Pro asked for the origin of divisibility, comparability, connectivity, sensitivity, transmorability, substitutability, and satisfability....through the mechanism of natural selection and common descent..... Needless to say, Pro lost....unfortunately..
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
suriaguruBillBonJoviTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by BillBonJovi 6 years ago
BillBonJovi
suriaguruBillBonJoviTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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