The Instigator
grimmjow
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
JustCallMeTarzan
Con (against)
Winning
42 Points

god or big bang

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/16/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,192 times Debate No: 6254
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (7)

 

grimmjow

Pro

I think their is a god who created us and the world now their are thing in the bible that I think are story made to explain on asked questions but that a big bang created us has just as much holes as god or more if you can explain about the creation of a cell is just imposable and the missing link is some thing you can't explain how some primate became so smart in only about 1000 years now not saying that my religion is any better but you can't rule every thing out.
JustCallMeTarzan

Con

Only 1000 characters? Really?

Regardless of the resolution, it is clear that my opponent contends that:

1) God exists.
2) God created us and the world.
3) The Bible offers explanations about the nature of God.
4) The Big Bang Theory (BBT) has just as many holes as religious explanations.
5) Primates evolved to homo sapiens in 1000 years.

Obviously God's existence is a prerequisite for him being an explanation of the big bang. However, the god that my opponent references as being explained by the bible (the Judeo-Christian God) is logically inconsistent due to the problem of evil. Regardless of the number of holes (merely unexplained things) in the BBT, there are not merely holes, but contradictions in the biblical explanation for the creation of the universe. Obviously holes are far superior to contradictions. And there is ample evidence against 1000-year ape evolution.

I'd post more, but my opponent has limited me to 1000 characters.
Debate Round No. 1
grimmjow

Pro

grimmjow forfeited this round.
JustCallMeTarzan

Con

My work here is done... oops - looks like I've almost used up my 1000 character limit.
Debate Round No. 2
grimmjow

Pro

grimmjow forfeited this round.
JustCallMeTarzan

Con

My work here is done... again... oops - looks like I've almost used up my 1000 character limit.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Kleptin 7 years ago
Kleptin
(However, one will be made available upon request)
Posted by Kleptin 7 years ago
Kleptin
Clear and objective win. There is no need for a review when one person forfeits 2/3 rounds.
Posted by theitalianstallion 8 years ago
theitalianstallion
The hydrogen and oxygen were really always here, or brought here by a comet or other celestial bodies, just not as H2O. Energy was needed to start the reaction between the hydrogen and oxygen; the energy most likely came from electrical storms. Once the reaction took place, there was water vapor, and as the Earth cooled it became liquid. At least that's the theory.
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 8 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
Elemental hydrogen and oxygen from comets, gaseous clouds, stellar expulsions - etc... The matter that composes earth used to be in gaseous and particle form free floating in space. Volcanic processes on earth are actually responsible for a lot of the water. I suggest you read "Atom" - it explains the process very well.
Posted by navygirlfriend_x3 8 years ago
navygirlfriend_x3
if you really look at the big bang theory it seems virtually impossible, as in when there was supposedly " no water on Earth" how the heck did it get here then? My biology teacher tries to say that it rained and thats how the oceans got here, but I have a hard time believing that.
Posted by jjmd280 8 years ago
jjmd280
Oh, I have no doubt you'll do better with said character limit.
Posted by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
Haha true that. Anyway, I'll be looking forward to reading this debate - imagine the intellectual discourse one can do in increments of 1000 characters!
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 8 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
His lack of punctuation means I'm better at using 1000 characters. He just talks a lot, but doesn't SAY more.
Posted by jjmd280 8 years ago
jjmd280
Not too sure about that Tarzan - he isn't bothered with extraneous stuff like PUNCTUATION.
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 8 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
Yeah - I didn't look at that... but he only gets 1000 characters too - and I'm willing to bet that I can use 1000 characters better than he can...
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 7 years ago
Maikuru
grimmjowJustCallMeTarzanTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by mrbullfrog11 7 years ago
mrbullfrog11
grimmjowJustCallMeTarzanTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
grimmjowJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 7 years ago
Kleptin
grimmjowJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 
Vote Placed by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
grimmjowJustCallMeTarzanTied
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 
Vote Placed by JustCallMeTarzan 7 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
grimmjowJustCallMeTarzanTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
grimmjowJustCallMeTarzanTied
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