The Instigator
godsnumberis7
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Shadowhuntress
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

the earth is 6000ish years old

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 4 votes the winner is...
Shadowhuntress
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/30/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 650 times Debate No: 55775
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (4)

 

godsnumberis7

Pro

1st for acceptance only rule
Shadowhuntress

Con

We meet again...i accept
Debate Round No. 1
godsnumberis7

Pro

Ok well you might mention that dinosaurs aren't mentioned in the bible but we have found fossils but the word dinosaur wasn't invented until 1841 according to "The new answers book " but the bible does mention the word dragon in it and maybe that's what they looked like to the people back then.
Shadowhuntress

Con

And that supports your argument how?
Relative dating and fossil records have proved that some earth rocks are 4.6 billion years old (http://www.nature.com...). How can an earth rock be 4.6 billion years old if the earth is only 6000ish years old? It is impossible.
Debate Round No. 2
godsnumberis7

Pro

First off radiocarbon dating has been wrong when people have tested on rocks that they know the age of and it gave them millions of years as a result so how can we know that that rock is millions of years old.

My next point is since your a Christian you know that bible says that there was no sin, death, or bloodshed before Adam sinned so therefore the dinosaurs couldn't have died before Adam sinned and maybe the dinosaurs were wiped out during the flood.
Shadowhuntress

Con

Radiocarbon dating..."
And your proof of this is were? Sources? Links?

Yes I am Christian but that is beside the point. If Noah took two of every animal on the ark, dinosaurs could not have gone extinct in the flood. I still do not understand how the dragon thing helped your argument at all.
Debate Round No. 3
godsnumberis7

Pro

After Alexander the Great invaded India he brought back reports of seeing a great hissing dragon living in a cave. Later Greek rulers supposedly brought dragons alive from Ethiopia.(http://www.genesispark.com...)
A swimming race illustrates the simple principles involved in measuring time. This swimmer is competing in a 1,500 meter race and we have an accurate, calibrated wristwatch. We note that at the instant the swimmer touches the edge of the pool our wristwatch reads 7:41 and 53 seconds. How long has the competitor taken to swim the 1,500 meter race?
When I have asked an audience this question they have looked at me incredulously and said, "Starting time?" You cannot know how long the swimmer took unless you knew the time on the wristwatch when the race started. Without the starting time it is impossible to establish the time for the race. Note: Impossible.
Actually, knowing the starting time is still not enough. During the race you have to watch the swimmer and count how many laps he has swum so you know that he has done 1,500 meters. And you have to check to make sure he touches the edge at the end of each lap. Without these observations you cannot be sure that the time is valid. That is why you need at least two, sometimes three judges to measure the time of the race to the standard needed to enter the record books.
Shadowhuntress

Con

Again with the dragons. My opponent has gone off on a rant about mythical creatures. His dragons are dinosaurs argument has absolutely nothing to do with this debate! He claims carbon dating is inaccurate but showed you no proof. He claims he asked an audience a question, but told you nothing of who the audience was or what credentials they had to their name.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by godsnumberis7 3 years ago
godsnumberis7
first of all maybe in the bible they called the dinosaurs dragons, I wasn't saying dinosaurs are dragons
Posted by LifeMeansGodIsGood 3 years ago
LifeMeansGodIsGood
it's pretty easy to find all of the proofs that evolutionary "science" fabricates in imaginary multi-billion year history. Just enter in your web browser a phrase like "evidences that the eart is young" or "proof that evolutionary science is bogus" or "evidence of creation" or proofs that the earth is approx 6000 years old" . Don't let people bully you acting like they are the authorities over you, ascerting things to be true when they really can't prove it. Death proves God rules over them. Don't let them forget it by trying to lose themselves in multiple billions of years of fabricated history in which their only hope is that death will relieve them of all pain, suffering, and responsiblity. Preach the gospel. They need to be saved from the fire of hell before it's too late.
Posted by LifeMeansGodIsGood 3 years ago
LifeMeansGodIsGood
Relative dating and fossil records have proved that some earth rocks are 4.6 billion years old......this has not been proven at all. You have to believe it without proof if you want to believe it. Nothing can be proven back past approximately 6000 years of recorded history.
Posted by LifeMeansGodIsGood 3 years ago
LifeMeansGodIsGood
Relative dating and fossil records have proved that some earth rocks are 4.6 billion years old......this has not been proven at all. You have to believe it without proof if you want to believe it. Nothing can be proven back past approximately 6000 years of recorded history.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by dairygirl4u2c 3 years ago
dairygirl4u2c
godsnumberis7ShadowhuntressTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: 1
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
godsnumberis7ShadowhuntressTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro argued that dragons exist instead of staying on topic.
Vote Placed by Ajab 3 years ago
Ajab
godsnumberis7ShadowhuntressTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: In general no side provided an argument, Shadow provided a source but did not explain it properly, Pro tackled by stating that dinosaurs could have been dragons when the both are obviously different. Then Pro did not provide any solid foundation but a Christian site. So while I give the debate to shadow I do not feel any side made a proper argument.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
godsnumberis7ShadowhuntressTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro offered no sufficient counter-argument to Con's carbon-dating argument. Sources to Con because the source used was the difference between the debate.