The Instigator
Raistlin
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
Oceanus
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Resolved: The Theory of Evolution is Consistent with Scientific Evidence.

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 1 vote the winner is...
Raistlin
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/11/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 425 times Debate No: 66832
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

Raistlin

Pro

The Bible, or for that matter any Holy Book, is not valid evidence in this debate. Only scientific evidence may be used by either side. Note that I am not rejecting the Bible as a person but rather limiting the debate to a scientific one.

Let's define a very important term.

Theory of Evolution- The scientific theory that states current organisms descended from ancient ones with modification by means of natural selection and mutation, and that all life descended from a common ancestor.

The first round is for acceptance only, and no new arguments may be made in the final round. Good luck to con!
Oceanus

Con

Jesus is love, just like Shrek. I'm a swagalicious atheist, but I will try to debate from this side (which I obviously don't agree with). Bananas are formed perfectly to your hand. That is obvious evidence.
History is not open to scientific testing. Geologists, therefore, interpret the geologic record using their limited understanding of modern geologic processes, typically by comparing the record with slow processes known to occur in historic times.

However, geologists in the last 30 years have recognized evidence within strata supporting regional, continental, and global catastrophic events that appear to have formed the major portion of the record. Natural disasters and their aftermaths have direct application to interpreting the geologic record. Geologists must deliberately and unabashedly discard outdated uniformitarian thinking and adopt, without reservation, a global catastrophic model.

Catastrophist patterns of interpretation have thoroughly permeated conventional thinking about the geologic record; geologists are deliberately reevaluating outdated uniformitarian thinking and are increasingly adopting a global catastrophic model.
http://www.icr.org...
I LOVE THE MISS-SPELLED, OR EVEN MADE UP WORDS, AND I PASTED THIS STRAIGHT FROM THE PREMIER CREATION EVIDENCE SITE. LOL
Debate Round No. 1
Raistlin

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for taking this debate. However, he seems to have ignored the rule clearly laid down in round one: the first round is for acceptance only. Nevertheless, I shall rebut my opponent's arguments before moving on to my own.

My opponent quotes the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) ad verbatim. As he does not attempt to pass off the work as his own, it is not plagiarism, but copying and pasting arguments from the Internet is contrary to the spirit of a debate. I am essentially arguing against the ICR and not against con. The central problem with the ICR's argument is that there is no evidence to support it. The ICR cites no sources, conducts no research, and has no evidence to back up its claims. This can be verified by following the link. My opponent's argument is therefore baseless. If he wishes to make an argument, it must be from scientific evidence, as the resolution clearly states.

Now, let's look at some evidence for evolution. Evolution predicts the existence of transitional forms in precise locations in the fossil record. These predictions have been proven correct every time. One prominent example is tiktaalik, though there are hundreds of other transitional forms that have been discovered. Tiktaalik's location in the fossil record was predicted by evolution, and it was found exactly where it was predicted, proving the predictive power of evolution. [1] Evolution predicts humans and great apes share a recent common ancestor. As the great apes have an additional chromosome pair over humans, this initially appears to be impossible. However, a careful scientific study shows that chromosome 2 was formed by a fusion of 2 other chromosomes. [2] Note that the source cited is from the scientific Journal PNAS (proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences), published by one of the most prestigious scientific organizations in the world, and it contains rigorous, peer reviewed scientific analysis of the evidence by excellent scientists, as well as a lot of citations. Only evolution had the ability to predict the fusion, which demonstrates its qualifications as a theory.

In summary, I have presented powerful evidence that evolution both predicted and explained.

Sources
1- http://www.sciencedaily.com...
2- http://www.pnas.org...
Oceanus

Con

Oceanus forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Raistlin

Pro

Extend my arguments to the next round.
Oceanus

Con

Oceanus forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Oceanus

Con

Oceanus forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
RaistlinOceanusTied
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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture