The Instigator
jewelessien
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
Kazerian2001
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The current concept of macroevolution is far from solid

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 1 vote the winner is...
jewelessien
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/8/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 566 times Debate No: 40162
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

jewelessien

Pro

First of all, perhaps I should lay out what I mean by evolution here. There are two types of evolution - macro and micro. Microevolution - the processes of genetic mutation and natural selection that give rise to differentiation or improvement of species - is a proven deal; it's been observed, tested and recreated both in nature and in the lab. This is the finch's evolution in Darwin's Origin of Species. But the theory of macroevolution, on the other hand, attempts to explain how life arose and diversified up to this point using the science of microevolution, with the absence of any external (or maybe I should say extraterrestrial) influences.

Most, if not all, biology textbooks today present both forms of evolution as an open-and-shut case, a thing that's been proved over and over again. But is this really true? I have never found any literature that has definitively defended the theory of macroevolution, and the ever-widening field of molecular biology tends to contradict rather than support the theory as it is today. So is the education system lying to us, or does anyone have evidence I haven't read about yet?
Kazerian2001

Con

Well talking about textbooks, textbooks and media keep trying to make it look like Neanderthals (White People) were the first humans. Which they were not. It's all bullcrap. And the they've been lying for years saying that we came from Chimps. We evolved from apes, but not chimps.
Debate Round No. 1
jewelessien

Pro

I'm sorry, this doesn't really answer the question. I agree that the media misrepresents almost everything, but textbooks are the foundation of our education. We study them, we learn out of them, we write exams based on them to get us to higher levels. Kids may question the media, but they generally don't question their textbooks or what their teachers say. So textbooks must be accurate, or what we 'know' becomes invalid.

And, speaking of 'knowing', Neanderthals were not 'white people' but a hominid species remarkably similar to humans, except with a few skeletal differences such as a larger cranium, heavier brows and jutting jaw. No-one claims they were 'white', because no-one knows the color of their skin (which decays or turns to a leathery mess pretty fast). And this debate is trying to establish whether we arose from apes at all, and if so whether it was according to the current explanation, and it's extended to cover all species. So the chimp issue isn't really relevant, though they are arguably the closest species to man.
Kazerian2001

Con

Then why the desk you invite me on this debate
Debate Round No. 2
jewelessien

Pro

Sigh.
I didn't invite you. I posted an open debate.
Thanks so much for ruining my first ever online debate.
Kazerian2001

Con

Kazerian2001 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
jewelessien

Pro

jewelessien forfeited this round.
Kazerian2001

Con

Kazerian2001 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by GarretKadeDupre 2 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
Don't let this debate discourage you. It will happen again, many times again. Don't let that statement discourage you, either.
Posted by EthanM 3 years ago
EthanM
Kazerian, I don't suggest accepting debates if you aren't already knowledgable in the subject you're defending.
Posted by TrueScotsman 3 years ago
TrueScotsman
Would have loved to take up the Con side of this debate, but Kazerian2001 decided to waste what could have been another good discussion..
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Enji 3 years ago
Enji
jewelessienKazerian2001Tied
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: F.F.