The Instigator
octo
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
KaleBevilacqua
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

evolution is not real

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 2 votes the winner is...
KaleBevilacqua
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/16/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 327 times Debate No: 44097
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

octo

Pro

Imagine if you found a pocketwatch the woods while hiking. You world pick it up and look at it now you should say" I wonder who made this watch" not "look what nature made. "It should be the same for the earth it did not just appear it had To be created see what I mean. Can you proof he that evolution in real.
KaleBevilacqua

Con

First, let me lay down a few things. Evolution is a biological phenomenon that results in different species. It is a scientific theory, meaning that it is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation."


1) Evolution only explains how a variety of species came to be, not how the earth or life was formed. Perhaps there was a Creator for the earth or for original life, but evolution doesn't include, prove, or deny that. It only shows that species naturally branched off from each other due to changes in genes.

2) We know and observe that humans create watches; they are a human-constructed innovation. We can never know, however, whether we were created because that is currently an unfalsifiable statement. That's irrelevant to evolution, though.




Here's my case for evolution:
"Thousands of human fossils enable researchers and students to study the changes that occurred in brain and body size, locomotion, diet, and other aspects regarding the way of life of early human species over the past 6 million years." [1] In other words, human physiology has changed over the period of our existence. That is evolution taking place.


Additionally: "Study of human genetics show how closely related we are to other primates– in fact, how connected we are with all other organisms – and can indicate the prehistoric migrations of our species, Homo sapiens, all over the world. Advances in the dating of fossils and artifacts help determine the age of those remains, which contributes to the big picture of when different milestones in becoming human evolved."



Few more quick points:
1) Early humans' behavior was strikingly similar to the behavior of primates, who came into existence before us.[2]

2) One would use genetics to test whether people were biologically related, whether they were coming from the same family. According to the Smithsonian Institute, "The same is true for the relationships among organisms." The genetic difference between a human and another human is about 0.1% on average. Study of the same aspects of the chimpanzee genome indicates a difference of about 1.2% from humans. The bonobo, which is the close cousin of chimpanzees, differs from humans to the same degree. The DNA difference with gorillas, another of the African apes, is about 1.6%. Most importantly, chimpanzees, bonobos, and humans all show this same amount of difference from gorillas. This implies that all of these species have some degree of distant relation and strongly shows that we started out close to the same and branched off.[3]



Sources:
[1]: http://humanorigins.si.edu...
[2]: http://humanorigins.si.edu...
[3]: http://humanorigins.si.edu...
Debate Round No. 1
octo

Pro

octo forfeited this round.
KaleBevilacqua

Con

Well, it's unfortunate that my opponent had to forfeit. This could have been a good debate. If you want to continue, octo, I'd be willing to rebut your arguments if you return. But at this point, I extend my contentions.
Debate Round No. 2
octo

Pro

octo forfeited this round.
KaleBevilacqua

Con

KaleBevilacqua forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by KaleBevilacqua 2 years ago
KaleBevilacqua
Um, why did octo win the point for spelling and grammar?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by chengste 2 years ago
chengste
octoKaleBevilacquaTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Yes micro evolution exists, PRO did not define what he wanted to do so he was stuck, CON did a very good job defining and showing micro evolution
Vote Placed by xXx_Warshak_xXx 2 years ago
xXx_Warshak_xXx
octoKaleBevilacquaTied
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:16 
Reasons for voting decision: Scientist have altered there proof as for Evolution being true is it? who know's for sure, but it is a higher guesed theory for the origin of us I still stand nutreal in my believe's but in Debate KaleBevilacqua you made some good point's in your arguement.