The Instigator
IntellectualAtheist
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
ProfJacob
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Young Earth Creationism

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...
IntellectualAtheist
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/10/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 405 times Debate No: 45535
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

IntellectualAtheist

Con

Rules

1. I will negate the resolution that a God created us, but that we originated from monkeys, evolving overtime into what we are now.

2. No plagiarism; Don't copy someone else's work and claim it as your own.

3. No trolling.

4. No semantics.

5. The BoP (Burden of Proof) is shared.

6. First round is for acceptance only (With the exception of clarifications).

Failure to follow these rules will result in a 7-point forfeiture. These rules also apply to me.
ProfJacob

Pro

I will argue in favor of the resolution that we were indeed created by a God.

I accept, and look forward to your arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
IntellectualAtheist

Con

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

Presentations

Fossil evidence


In the fossil record: There are snapshots from the past in which, if arranged from oldest to earliest, illustrate a panorama of evolutionary change overtime. The snapshots may be scattered in places and have bits missing, but that which we are left with clearly supports the claim that we originated from different animals, evolving overtime.

Similarities between humans and related living organisms

During and since Darwin was born, people have been studying animals. Scientists, lately, have been discovering that we humans share DNA with others as our former selves (Or at least some)(Monkeys)[1].

I await my opponent's set of arguments.

Sources

[1] http://www.sciencedaily.com...


ProfJacob

Pro

Rebuttals

I concede; I won't rebut any of your arguments. I will simply rebut other arguments that argue against creationism.

"Prayers don't come true"

Well, there was this movie where a God was so lazy that he decided to grant all wishes. Chaos ensued. That's why God doesn't do so.
Debate Round No. 2
IntellectualAtheist

Con

My opponent conceded.

Rebuttals

""Prayers don't come true"

Well, there was this movie where a God was so lazy that he decided to grant all wishes. Chaos ensued. That's why God doesn't do so."

Yes. Chaos would've ensued. However, God should've listed that restriction. Otherwise, no. Don't attempt to modify the Bible. So, the people starred in the Bible have sinned to, and also have been forgiven. So, how are we distinct from them in a sense that we don't have our prayers granted and we don't receive answers like they do?

Anyhow, Creationism isn't associated with Christianity; Creationism is simply the claim that a higher power created us humans. It doesn't have to be the biblical God.


I await my opponent's next set of arguments.
ProfJacob

Pro

Alright. I concede that point, though, but I no longer concede to loss.

Presentations

1. How could I argue creationism if I do not make the claim that Life appeared spontaneously? If you look at the fossil record you will notice that there are gaps and then all of a sudden complex life comes around[4][5][6]. How can you discredit an explanation as to why there are gaps in the fossil record?

2. Mutations are just about always harmful in living organisms in the wild. With mutations being so rare is It really logical to think that it is possible for at least 16 millions different species to evolve based on a mere chance[7]?
Debate Round No. 3
IntellectualAtheist

Con

Rebuttals

"How could I argue creationism if I do not make the claim that Life appeared spontaneously? If you look at the fossil record you will notice that there are gaps and then all of a sudden complex life comes around[4][5][6]. How can you discredit an explanation as to why there are gaps in the fossil record?"

Fossil records of 1 amongst many varieties of species are exceedingly rare, and only occur under specific conditions, and that the earliest multi-cellular life forms were all soft-bodied (And invertebrates) and thus left little to no trace as fossils for us to observe due to not having a bone that doesn't rot, unlike the body.

"Mutations are just about always harmful in living organisms in the wild. With mutations being so rare is It really logical to think that it is possible for at least 16 millions different species to evolve based on a mere chance[7]?"

If you meant that according to evolution, there aren't 16 million different kinds of species, then the question is irrelevant. Otherwise:

Doesn't this defend MY position? How so? Because, if mutations are completely rare (Meaning that not often are animals changed into another kind[1]), and most animals remained their kind, ? Hopefully, you realize the flaw in your argument.

I await my opponent's next set of arguments.

Sources

[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
ProfJacob

Pro

""Mutations are just about always harmful in living organisms in the wild. With mutations being so rare is It really logical to think that it is possible for at least 16 millions different species to evolve based on a mere chance[7]?"

If you meant that according to evolution, there aren't 16 million different kinds of species, then the question is irrelevant. Otherwise:

Doesn't this defend MY position? How so? Because, if mutations are completely rare (Meaning that not often are animals changed into another kind[1]), and most animals remained their kind, ? Hopefully, you realize the flaw in your argument."

Not really. Evolution states that there aren't 16 million different kinds of species.
Debate Round No. 4
IntellectualAtheist

Con

Rebuttals

"""Mutations are just about always harmful in living organisms in the wild. With mutations being so rare is It really logical to think that it is possible for at least 16 millions different species to evolve based on a mere chance[7]?"

If you meant that according to evolution, there aren't 16 million different kinds of species, then the question is irrelevant. Otherwise:

Doesn't this defend MY position? How so? Because, if mutations are completely rare (Meaning that not often are animals changed into another kind[1]), and most animals remained their kind, ? Hopefully, you realize the flaw in your argument."

Not really. Evolution states that there aren't 16 million different kinds of species."

Then, like said, the question is irrelevant.

Also, (Apologies. I'm a pedant) evolution doesn't state things. It's simply impossible. Evolution is an inanimate noun.

New Presentation(s)

Recordings

Scientists have observed, and some have also documented (And maybe published documentary), evolution of monkeys.

I await my opponent's next set of arguments.
ProfJacob

Pro

ProfJacob forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Sagey 2 years ago
Sagey
Monkeys and Hominids all likely evolved from small rodent or shrew like insectivores that existed around the same time as the Dinosaurs and before that, an amphibian, and before that a lungfish.
etc... etc...
Though here is the History of Creationism.

It all originated from the Seventh Day Adventist leader Ellen White who had hallucinations about seeing the Six Days Of Creation, due to brain damage.

So Creationism evolved from Hallucinations of a Brain Damaged person.

Here is the History Of Creationism:
https://www.youtube.com...
Posted by Skyangel 2 years ago
Skyangel
From what did the monkeys originate?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Complicated_Mind 2 years ago
Complicated_Mind
IntellectualAtheistProfJacobTied
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: Conduct clearly goes to Con due to a concession. Arguments go to Con for obvious reasons; Pro proved nothing and failed to successfully rebut ANY of Con's arguments and refuted things Con didn't even say (Pro made his opening arguments in round three). Con managed to successfully rebut all of Pro's contentions; Sources go to Con for using them; S&G is tied. It was a disappointing debate considering Pro claims to be a genius on his profile and has such a high win ratio.