The Instigator
kohai
Pro (for)
Winning
75 Points
The Contender
inferno
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Resolved: There is sufficient evidence for the belief in evolution

Do you like this debate?NoYes-19
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/27/2011 Category: Science
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,271 times Debate No: 17678
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (37)
Votes (14)

 

kohai

Pro

Greetings, we have been arguing in the main hall and it is time to take this one step further. I contend that there is sufficent evidence for evolution. Burden of proof is on me.

Evolution: Change in the allels of a species over time.

Good luck.
inferno

Con

Sufficient evidence ? This is more of reasonable doubt than anything else. You cannot prove to me without a shadow of
a doubt, that humans came from monkeys. This is a very strategically organized theory, made by mans fallacious imagination, that's designed to distort and
thwart out the belief about The Creation. God exists based on a plane that is foreign to secular minded non believers.
If you lack the experience of the Supernatural, then you cannot dispute this argument against those who have.
That is irrelevent and winning a debate proves nothing in the actuality of it all. It also does not prove that your theory is accurate or legit. It is more science fiction than it is fiction. Man is still here, and monkeys are, too. Monkeys are mammals who breed and give live birth. Humans do the same, so there would be NO USE for an evolutionary system to begin with as both species of animals carry themselves well in an ecosystem world.
That is the primary difference between me and you. I have been exposed, and you have not.
It cannot get any more logical than that my friend. You are one supernatural experience or life altering event away fron being exposed to truth. So why do you try to baffle me with this ficticious ideology. It has not caused doubts in most minds even those who have not been saturated by dogma. This is all acceptable speculation and this theory has even gone quite well with believers. It is more humorous than anything else. Our faith does not compromise here. I rest my case.
Debate Round No. 1
kohai

Pro

I wish to thank my opponent for this debate. As I stated, the burden of proof is on me.

You cannot prove to me without a shadow of a doubt, that humans came from monkeys.

I find this argument to be quite humorous to say the least. In fact, evolution does NOT say that we came from monkeys; rather we descended from a common ancestor.

Let's recall what I stated evolution means. Evolution is the change in the alleles of a species over time. In case you do not understand that, here is another definition I use. Therefore, all what I need to do to win this debate is to show evidence for that.

Furthermore, this undermines your beliefs. The Bible says that we came from dust. Why is there still dust?

(1) The change in genetic composition of a population over successive generations, which may be caused by natural selection, inbreeding, hybridization, or mutation.

(2) The sequence of events depicting the evolutionary development of a species or of a group of related organisms; phylogeny.

http://www.biology-online.org...


Over the course of this debate, I shall present major arguments for the proof of evolution.

Fact 1: Fossil Record Prove Evolution

Remember, all what I have to do to win this debate is to show how it is possible for the change in genetic composition of a population is possible and has happened.

Here is how the fossil record proves evolution:

  1. By comparing layers of sediment from different parts of the world, the sequence from the earliest life to present can and has been observed. In this way, the fossil record shows a change from simple to complex.
  2. Transitional fossils provide evidence for evolutionary change. For example, the evolution from ancient reptiles to mammals is well documented by a series of transition fossils. [1]

Fact 2: Bacteria proves evolution by its complexity and structure

Ladies and gentlemen, please direct your attention to source number 2. This was a research project done by scientist at the Michigan State University that took place over a period of 18 years. This scientist studied bacteria in support of evolution. This is what he found:

"In that time, the bacteria have changed significantly. For one thing, they are bigger — twice as big on average as their common ancestor. They are also far better at reproducing in these flasks, dividing 70 percent faster than their ancestor. These changes have emerged through spontaneous mutations and natural selection, and Dr. Lenski and his colleagues have been able to watch them unfold.

When Dr. Lenski began his experiment 18 years ago, only a few scientists believed they could observe evolution so closely. Today evolutionary experiments on microbes are under way in many laboratories. And thanks to the falling price of genome-sequencing technology, scientists can now zero in on the precise genetic changes that unfold during evolution, a power previous generations of researchers only dreamed of."

Fact 3: Bacteria proves evolution by its resistance.

If this isn’t proof of evolution, I do not know what is [3]. What is antibody resistance? Antibiotic resistance is the ability of bacteria or other microbes to resist the effects of an antibiotic. Antibiotic resistance occurs when bacteria change in some way that reduces or eliminates the effectiveness of drugs, chemicals, or other agents designed to cure or prevent infections. The bacteria survive and continue to multiply causing more harm.

| Conclusion |

I have presented these major arguments in favour of the change in the alleles of a species over time. They are:

  1. Examples of fossil evidence in support of evolution;
  2. Bacteria provides support for evolution by evolving;
  3. Bacteria provides support for evolution by its resistance.

All these prove that there has to be a change in the alleles over time. Back to you!

Sources:

  1. http://www.talkorigins.org...
  2. http://www.nytimes.com...
  3. http://www.cdc.gov...
inferno

Con

Yes that is true. Evolution is false. We did not come from monkeys are another type of common ancestors.
We are all human beings who were born the same through live birth as we are all mammals.
The information that you have presented my friend is just a collection of secular and highly flawed scientific data that cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, that evolution is indeed true. This is just a theory that has been questioned by the most reputable of all scientist since day one. One guy says this today, another guy says that tomorrow. When will it ever end. Truth has to be consistent. Your information is just hypothetical at best.
It proves nothing. We are not still evolving as people, we were always the same.
The dust is here because when we die, we do go back to dust. I refute that argument as well.
If you kill a dog and then come back about 1 year from now to the exact same spot. What is he then ? Dust.
So that argument was very illogical and had no factual substance whatsoever.
See this website below if you want some more proof. Or you can go to the Google space bar and type in this.
EVOLUTION IS FALSE, as is. You will see the numerous sites that have a whole arsenal of information that
debunks every single thing you just said.

http://www.newgeology.us...

My conclusion. If evolution is true, then why did we stop evolving. Why are we still in the presence of monkeys.
Are we the ancestors of another race of people that has yet to come. It seems illogical. What is the purpose of
this all ? What is the point ? This is nothing more than secular nonsense. Science does not have the answers to
all things, and they are always asking more questions about things they themselves do not fully believe or
understand. Why ? Because it is just theory and not fact. Truth is the final word here. If there is doubt, then
there is no reason for your presentation. What is the purpose I ask again. I would love to know. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
kohai

Pro

I wish to thank my opponent for this interesting debate. Unfortunately, my opponent has provided 0 eviidence for his claims. All what he did was present a link. I went to that link and it is too long to refute point by point. Please, do have some arguments of your own.

My conclusion. If evolution is true, then why did we stop evolving. We are evolving [1] Why are we still in the presence of monkeys. Because humans and monkeys evolved from a common ansestor. How about this, if God created us from dust, why is there still dust?
Are we the ancestors of another race of people that has yet to come. It seems illogical. What is the purpose of
this all ? What is the point ? This is nothing more than secular nonsense. Science does not have the answers to
all things, and they are always asking more questions about things they themselves do not fully believe or
understand. Why ? Because it is just theory and not fact. You have a poor understanding of the word theory. The word theory is defined as the following: It's a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations. [2]Truth is the final word here. If there is doubt, then
there is no reason for your presentation. What is the purpose I ask again. I would love to know. Thank you.

| Conclusion |

My opponent is yet to refute a single thing I presented. i narowly defined "evolution" which my opponent was trying to argue against. In addition, my opponent supported nothing of what he stated. I refuted all his so-called arguments. My opponent also has a poor understanding of what the word theory means. If evolution is just a theory, then creation is just an opinion!

I urge a strong vote for pro.

Sources
1. http://www.lurj.org...;
2. Scientific theories are explanations of natural phenomena built up logically from testable observations and hypotheses. Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science - National Academy Press
inferno

Con

I wish to thank my opponent on his up and coming debate victory. But it will be in vain for it is irrelevent to infinity.
What does this have to do with your soul ? Absolutely nothing. Do you think Hell is real ? Probably not.
Anyway. Your disbelief in God has already made you a candidate for anything that man can create. You are a sell out and idol worshipper. If I refuted your arguments it would not matter. Most of those who vote here are not
believers anyway. So your facts are irrelevent. Your logic is irrelevent. Your concepts and theories are all irrelevent and mean nothing to me. My view is philosophical. Now if you wish to debate me on that plane, then you have
absolutely no chance at all. Again, this is useless. I gave you my link. I told you what to do. Read the facts there
for yourself. I am not going to waste time on some flawed logic and false theories of man.
Why did I present it this way ? Because the truth stands. Evolution is false. It is a pity to fall prey to such
useless ideology. But then again, what was one to expect. Your whole existence is futile. Typical human. Mahwwaahaaaaaaaaagaahaaaa.

My conclusion: Evolution is false. Anyone can say they found something and put their own theory together and
turn it into anything. These so called facts are only organized ideas which are flawed by the way, and is put forth
to thwart out the belief in God and The Creation. And that is a fact. Simple and plain. Have a nice day.
Debate Round No. 3
37 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by TheAntidoter 4 years ago
TheAntidoter
Inferno Wins again.
Posted by bossyburrito 4 years ago
bossyburrito
Inferno totally pwned that kohai idiot devil worshiper.
Posted by bossyburrito 4 years ago
bossyburrito
Inferno totally pwned that kohai idiot devil worshiper.
Posted by Microsuck 4 years ago
Microsuck
-14 lol
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
-13 lol next
Posted by Microsuck 5 years ago
Microsuck
Lol; wow! kohai destroyed inferno. -12 really shows something.
Posted by Stephen_Hawkins 5 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
look at my siggy.
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 5 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
"So your facts are irrelevent. Your logic is irrelevent. Your concepts and theories are all irrelevent and mean nothing to me."

This is will go down in the pages of history as the best quote from DDO.
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 5 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
>> "My conclusion. If evolution is true, then why did we stop evolving."

LOL. Humans still are evolving. There was a HUGE article in either Popular Science or Scientific American about it recently.
Posted by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
Inferno, why do you always treat my name as a separate sentence?
14 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
kohaiinfernoTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: con uses merely one source and hopes to win. No chance, sir!
Vote Placed by Wallstreetatheist 4 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
kohaiinfernoTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: inferno is so lulz
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
kohaiinfernoTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: pro proved evolution is indeed real
Vote Placed by THEBOMB 4 years ago
THEBOMB
kohaiinfernoTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Evolution is real.....
Vote Placed by Yep 5 years ago
Yep
kohaiinfernoTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro proved Evolution is real. Simple as that.
Vote Placed by TUF 5 years ago
TUF
kohaiinfernoTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Inferno gave this debate up to his opponent.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
kohaiinfernoTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con trolled, also pro had better arguments more sources, and reliable ones
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
kohaiinfernoTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con only repeated statements of belief, without providing arguments or evidence in support of those beliefs. Refusing to debate the topic is a conduct violation. Pro provided arguments and sources. S
Vote Placed by JustCallMeTarzan 5 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
kohaiinfernoTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments and sources were obvious. As Thett said, Pro argued, Con didn't. Conduct to Pro because Con's single source was basically a LMGTFY, and also for the R3 post alleging (irrelevant) philosophical superiority.
Vote Placed by Cerebral_Narcissist 5 years ago
Cerebral_Narcissist
kohaiinfernoTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Though Pro makes several critical errors Con fails in every possible way.