The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Mharman
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

bacterius? lol

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/8/2017 Category: Science
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 503 times Debate No: 100704
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (19)
Votes (0)

 

vi_spex

Pro

if a birds nest is natural, nature is designed by the intelligence of a bacteria
Mharman

Con

Nature is not designed by bacteria. Also, kfc.
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

kfc is not natural

so you argument is, no?
Mharman

Con

I'm not talking about the restaurant chain.

I'm saying that is not designed by bacteria but rather, God. There is plenty of evidence for it.
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

all evidence points to the bacteria so far
Mharman

Con

Let's go to the evidence then.

You claim a bird's nest to be evidence of nature being designed by bacteria. I find it evidence of God's design. He has made the birds so that they create those nests. Looking at the beauty of his nature and how well everything works, it all points to God being the creator.

When saying bacteria created everything, you are clearly referencing evolution; thus, all I need to do to win is to provide a stellar argument agains evolution. Evolution also relies upon an alleged "big bang" to create the universe so that evolution to start. This means that one needs to provide a stellar against the the big bang in order to provide a stellar argument against evolution, in order to win this debate.

Let's go back to about "13 billion" years ago. Scientists claim that a huge explosion happened, and it created the universe. Ignoring the fact that explosions destroy, not create, there is another huge hole. Where did this explosion come from? Scientists claim lightning hit a pool of chemicals. Where did the pool of chemicals come from? Where did the lightning come from? Scientists claim that a single nonorganic molecule evolved into the pool of lightning. Where did that molecule come from? Scientists claim that it popped out of nowhere. For evolution to work, there would have to be a single particle appear out of 100% nothing. However, there is a 0% chance that a particle can happen out of nowhere. This means that there has to be theistic creation.

I think we're done here.
Debate Round No. 3
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by madness 10 months ago
madness
Birds make birds, not God
Posted by whiteflame 10 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: FuzzyCatPotato// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments), 1 point to Pro (Conduct). Reasons for voting decision: Con obviously won, because Con put all of his main arguments in the final round so that Pro couldn't respond. Dick move. And no, nature isn't proof of God's design. fite me irl

[*Reason for removal*] Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter is required to specifically assess arguments made by both debaters. Simply stating the voter"s perspective on a single point and pointing out that some arguments were necessarily dropped is not sufficient.
************************************************************************
Posted by vi_spex 10 months ago
vi_spex
so you deny the evidence?
Posted by Mharman 10 months ago
Mharman
Sure. Just blatantly tell me I'm wrong without providing evidence, why don't you?
Posted by vi_spex 10 months ago
vi_spex
you can claim anything to be the case
Posted by Mharman 10 months ago
Mharman
Oh, vi_spex...
Posted by vi_spex 10 months ago
vi_spex
not in reality
Posted by Mharman 10 months ago
Mharman
Creation is possible.
Posted by vi_spex 10 months ago
vi_spex
its design
Posted by canis 10 months ago
canis
No. Only the making.
No votes have been placed for this debate.