Total Posts:42|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Evolution Creationism Debate

Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.

A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 1:37:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.

A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

I guess some people are not into debating. My evidences for evolution don't require any definition of kind specifically. Anyway, looking at your previous posts about evolution, you wouldn't be much of a challenge, no offense.
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 1:42:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 1:37:27 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.

A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

I guess some people are not into debating. My evidences for evolution don't require any definition of kind specifically. Anyway, looking at your previous posts about evolution, you wouldn't be much of a challenge, no offense.

I've had plenty of debates (see my old account DATCMOTO)

What is your best evidence?
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 1:51:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
So in the previous thread, you were just trolling?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 1:54:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 1:51:10 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
So in the previous thread, you were just trolling?

If you 'reply and quote' then everyone knows who you are addressing..
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 1:54:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 1:51:10 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
So in the previous thread, you were just trolling?

Nope, I was debating for the other side. I find it helps me maintain my objectivity. This seems to be something you have very little of when it comes to science and religion.
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 2:01:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 1:42:37 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:37:27 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.

A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

I guess some people are not into debating. My evidences for evolution don't require any definition of kind specifically. Anyway, looking at your previous posts about evolution, you wouldn't be much of a challenge, no offense.

I've had plenty of debates (see my old account DATCMOTO)

What is your best evidence?

Ok. Maybe you know something about that particular topic. I don't have a best argument. One good argument comes from endogenous retroviruses. These are genetic sequences inserted by viruses into a human host that are passed down. We already know that humans and apes have many retroviruses. If evolution is true, humans and apes should share at least a few of these because we are related and inherited our DNA from a common ancestor.

In fact so far we have found 7 retrovirus sequences humans and apes share. We can form a family tree of apes by shared retroviruses, that looks like the overall genetic family tree. If evolution was not true, then it is improbable that humans and apes would have the exact same retrovirus insertions.

http://www.talkorigins.org...
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 2:03:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 2:01:18 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:42:37 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:37:27 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.

A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

I guess some people are not into debating. My evidences for evolution don't require any definition of kind specifically. Anyway, looking at your previous posts about evolution, you wouldn't be much of a challenge, no offense.

I've had plenty of debates (see my old account DATCMOTO)

What is your best evidence?

Ok. Maybe you know something about that particular topic. I don't have a best argument. One good argument comes from endogenous retroviruses. These are genetic sequences inserted by viruses into a human host that are passed down. We already know that humans and apes have many retroviruses. If evolution is true, humans and apes should share at least a few of these because we are related and inherited our DNA from a common ancestor.

In fact so far we have found 7 retrovirus sequences humans and apes share. We can form a family tree of apes by shared retroviruses, that looks like the overall genetic family tree. If evolution was not true, then it is improbable that humans and apes would have the exact same retrovirus insertions.

http://www.talkorigins.org...

Complete theory; there's a thousand reasons why we could share such viruses..

How do you deal with poly strata fossils?
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 2:03:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

But if creationists weren't able to use the word kind, how would they invent an imaginary barrier between animals that has no biological basis?
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 2:09:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 2:03:59 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

But if creationists weren't able to use the word kind, how would they invent an imaginary barrier between animals that has no biological basis?

Or, with the Kind word, how would evolutionists make micro into macro?

But thanks for proving my point;D the more you drag it down this cul de sac;D
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 2:19:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 2:03:43 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:01:18 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:42:37 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:37:27 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.

A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

I guess some people are not into debating. My evidences for evolution don't require any definition of kind specifically. Anyway, looking at your previous posts about evolution, you wouldn't be much of a challenge, no offense.

I've had plenty of debates (see my old account DATCMOTO)

What is your best evidence?

Ok. Maybe you know something about that particular topic. I don't have a best argument. One good argument comes from endogenous retroviruses. These are genetic sequences inserted by viruses into a human host that are passed down. We already know that humans and apes have many retroviruses. If evolution is true, humans and apes should share at least a few of these because we are related and inherited our DNA from a common ancestor.

In fact so far we have found 7 retrovirus sequences humans and apes share. We can form a family tree of apes by shared retroviruses, that looks like the overall genetic family tree. If evolution was not true, then it is improbable that humans and apes would have the exact same retrovirus insertions.

http://www.talkorigins.org...

Complete theory; there's a thousand reasons why we could share such viruses..

How do you deal with poly strata fossils?

You didn't really respond to my argument. If humans were created independently of apes, then viruses would have had to inserted almost the exact same sequences in the exact same places for both humans and chimps and have these inherited. This is highly improbable.

However we see these shared retroviruses in the entire class of apes. This just makes mere chance even more improbably. What is funny is that shared sequences among more distantly related apes, are also shared among more closely related apes. This perfectly fits what evolution predicts.

So please give me a likely explanation for this phenomenon, besides evolution of course.

Before I explain polystrate fossils, which I will, how do you explain this curious phenomenon?
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 2:28:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 2:19:22 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:03:43 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:01:18 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:42:37 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:37:27 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.

A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

I guess some people are not into debating. My evidences for evolution don't require any definition of kind specifically. Anyway, looking at your previous posts about evolution, you wouldn't be much of a challenge, no offense.

I've had plenty of debates (see my old account DATCMOTO)

What is your best evidence?

Ok. Maybe you know something about that particular topic. I don't have a best argument. One good argument comes from endogenous retroviruses. These are genetic sequences inserted by viruses into a human host that are passed down. We already know that humans and apes have many retroviruses. If evolution is true, humans and apes should share at least a few of these because we are related and inherited our DNA from a common ancestor.

In fact so far we have found 7 retrovirus sequences humans and apes share. We can form a family tree of apes by shared retroviruses, that looks like the overall genetic family tree. If evolution was not true, then it is improbable that humans and apes would have the exact same retrovirus insertions.

http://www.talkorigins.org...

Complete theory; there's a thousand reasons why we could share such viruses..

How do you deal with poly strata fossils?

You didn't really respond to my argument. If humans were created independently of apes, then viruses would have had to inserted almost the exact same sequences in the exact same places for both humans and chimps and have these inherited. This is highly improbable.

However we see these shared retroviruses in the entire class of apes. This just makes mere chance even more improbably. What is funny is that shared sequences among more distantly related apes, are also shared among more closely related apes. This perfectly fits what evolution predicts.

So please give me a likely explanation for this phenomenon, besides evolution of course.

I do not deny the physical similarities between man and apes, so however we attained the virus, is how they attained.. Out of how many viruses? Ever? That no longer exist? Someone's gotta win the lottery..
There are infinite variables with this stuff, which why it's a safe place to debate.

Before I explain polystrate fossils, which I will, how do you explain this curious phenomenon?

Nothing curious at all, the so called geologic column was layed down quickly in the great flood around 4000 yrs ago, something akin to putting mud in a jar of water and letting the layers settle.

Evolutionists say the layers are millions of years, old except when poly strata fossils are found, then they are not!
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 3:24:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 2:28:44 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:19:22 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:03:43 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:01:18 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:42:37 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:37:27 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.

A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

I guess some people are not into debating. My evidences for evolution don't require any definition of kind specifically. Anyway, looking at your previous posts about evolution, you wouldn't be much of a challenge, no offense.

I've had plenty of debates (see my old account DATCMOTO)

What is your best evidence?

Ok. Maybe you know something about that particular topic. I don't have a best argument. One good argument comes from endogenous retroviruses. These are genetic sequences inserted by viruses into a human host that are passed down. We already know that humans and apes have many retroviruses. If evolution is true, humans and apes should share at least a few of these because we are related and inherited our DNA from a common ancestor.

In fact so far we have found 7 retrovirus sequences humans and apes share. We can form a family tree of apes by shared retroviruses, that looks like the overall genetic family tree. If evolution was not true, then it is improbable that humans and apes would have the exact same retrovirus insertions.

http://www.talkorigins.org...

Complete theory; there's a thousand reasons why we could share such viruses..

How do you deal with poly strata fossils?

You didn't really respond to my argument. If humans were created independently of apes, then viruses would have had to inserted almost the exact same sequences in the exact same places for both humans and chimps and have these inherited. This is highly improbable.

However we see these shared retroviruses in the entire class of apes. This just makes mere chance even more improbably. What is funny is that shared sequences among more distantly related apes, are also shared among more closely related apes. This perfectly fits what evolution predicts.

So please give me a likely explanation for this phenomenon, besides evolution of course.

I do not deny the physical similarities between man and apes, so however we attained the virus, is how they attained.. Out of how many viruses? Ever? That no longer exist? Someone's gotta win the lottery..
There are infinite variables with this stuff, which why it's a safe place to debate.

There are about 30,000 ERVS. So far we have found seven that we share with chimps. We are not close to have found every similarity so this number is an underestimate. In fact more modern estimates have pushed that number to 16 at least.

Retroviruses consist of many different Nucleotide sequences so the chance of the vast majority of them being the same is tiny even if you have 30,000.Remember, we have about 20,000 genes so to have two ERV's matching is incredibly small, and to have simmilar sequences is even smaller. To have 16 matching is just too improbable.

http://www.debate.org...

Before I explain polystrate fossils, which I will, how do you explain this curious phenomenon?

Nothing curious at all, the so called geologic column was layed down quickly in the great flood around 4000 yrs ago, something akin to putting mud in a jar of water and letting the layers settle.

Evolutionists say the layers are millions of years, old except when poly strata fossils are found, then they are not!

Old earth geology does not say that all layers are laid down over millions of years. Some are laid down very quickly, others very slowly. So if a flood could bury a tree in sediment in a young earth model, who says it can't happen in an old earth model?
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 7:06:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
There don't seem to be that many skilled creationists who want to debate on this forum. I am rather surprised I did this well only talking about retroviruses.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 7:17:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
There are only two people on this site who can do the subject justice, Heineken [http://www.debate.org...] who is the best on the site and medic0506 who can at least form arguments [http://www.debate.org...]. The Creationist guy above is frequently featured on the Weekly Stupid and has been a joke on this site since day 1.

Add the two people I mentioned as friends, then post on their walls or send them messages about creating a debate on the topic. The topic should be more specific than "Evolution vs. Creationism." It should be a resolution (e.g. Homo sapiens sapiens and chimpanzees share a common ancestor, or There have been observed instances of speciation).
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Muted
Posts: 377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 8:19:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 7:17:52 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
There are only two people on this site who can do the subject justice, Heineken [http://www.debate.org...] who is the best on the site and medic0506 who can at least form arguments [http://www.debate.org...]. The Creationist guy above is frequently featured on the Weekly Stupid and has been a joke on this site since day 1.

Add the two people I mentioned as friends, then post on their walls or send them messages about creating a debate on the topic. The topic should be more specific than "Evolution vs. Creationism." It should be a resolution (e.g. Homo sapiens sapiens and chimpanzees share a common ancestor, or There have been observed instances of speciation).

Not me?! *Throws tantrum* :D
Heineken is a creationist? My impression is that he"s an evolutionist and that Dan4Reason wants to debate a creationist. Am I not right?

Anyway Dan, I would like to debate you on that. Just note that I currently have five debates running, so I might take awhile to respond. And like WSA said, please be specific (Since the range of topics is incredibly wide). I love specifics. Possibly a resolution such as ERVs support evolution via common descent, or antibody resistance support punctuated equilibrium, etc...
On another note, you shouldn"t place your arguments on this thread. This ideally should be a thread where people who want to debate you come to discuss the exact resolution, unless you prefer doing so in a PM.
I would prefer if, should you challenge me, to do so next week.

For the definition of evolution, I would have no problems with just "change over time," because that is what I believe as well. For a debate to be effective, it must be a particular type of change. Change that can theoretically transform a bacteria into a human, mutations leading to different genus, etc. This is because I do not believe speciation proves evolution (Which can itself be a subject of debate)

Thanks.
Exterminate!!!!!!-Dalek.

The ability to speak does not make you a competent debater.

One does not simply do the rain dance.
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 8:31:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 8:19:54 PM, Muted wrote:
At 11/21/2012 7:17:52 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
There are only two people on this site who can do the subject justice, Heineken [http://www.debate.org...] who is the best on the site and medic0506 who can at least form arguments [http://www.debate.org...]. The Creationist guy above is frequently featured on the Weekly Stupid and has been a joke on this site since day 1.

Add the two people I mentioned as friends, then post on their walls or send them messages about creating a debate on the topic. The topic should be more specific than "Evolution vs. Creationism." It should be a resolution (e.g. Homo sapiens sapiens and chimpanzees share a common ancestor, or There have been observed instances of speciation).

Not me?! *Throws tantrum* :D
Heineken is a creationist? My impression is that he"s an evolutionist and that Dan4Reason wants to debate a creationist. Am I not right?


Anyway Dan, I would like to debate you on that. Just note that I currently have five debates running, so I might take awhile to respond. And like WSA said, please be specific (Since the range of topics is incredibly wide). I love specifics. Possibly a resolution such as ERVs support evolution via common descent, or antibody resistance support punctuated equilibrium, etc...
On another note, you shouldn"t place your arguments on this thread. This ideally should be a thread where people who want to debate you come to discuss the exact resolution, unless you prefer doing so in a PM.
I would prefer if, should you challenge me, to do so next week.

For the definition of evolution, I would have no problems with just "change over time," because that is what I believe as well. For a debate to be effective, it must be a particular type of change. Change that can theoretically transform a bacteria into a human, mutations leading to different genus, etc. This is because I do not believe speciation proves evolution (Which can itself be a subject of debate)

Thanks.

Sure, my favorite topic is human evolution. Is that specific enough? I am glad there are some creationists here who know what they are doing. The last guy I was talking to wasn't all that good.
Muted
Posts: 377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 8:42:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 8:31:17 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 8:19:54 PM, Muted wrote:
At 11/21/2012 7:17:52 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
There are only two people on this site who can do the subject justice, Heineken [http://www.debate.org...] who is the best on the site and medic0506 who can at least form arguments [http://www.debate.org...]. The Creationist guy above is frequently featured on the Weekly Stupid and has been a joke on this site since day 1.

Add the two people I mentioned as friends, then post on their walls or send them messages about creating a debate on the topic. The topic should be more specific than "Evolution vs. Creationism." It should be a resolution (e.g. Homo sapiens sapiens and chimpanzees share a common ancestor, or There have been observed instances of speciation).

Not me?! *Throws tantrum* :D
Heineken is a creationist? My impression is that he"s an evolutionist and that Dan4Reason wants to debate a creationist. Am I not right?


Anyway Dan, I would like to debate you on that. Just note that I currently have five debates running, so I might take awhile to respond. And like WSA said, please be specific (Since the range of topics is incredibly wide). I love specifics. Possibly a resolution such as ERVs support evolution via common descent, or antibody resistance support punctuated equilibrium, etc...
On another note, you shouldn"t place your arguments on this thread. This ideally should be a thread where people who want to debate you come to discuss the exact resolution, unless you prefer doing so in a PM.
I would prefer if, should you challenge me, to do so next week.

For the definition of evolution, I would have no problems with just "change over time," because that is what I believe as well. For a debate to be effective, it must be a particular type of change. Change that can theoretically transform a bacteria into a human, mutations leading to different genus, etc. This is because I do not believe speciation proves evolution (Which can itself be a subject of debate)

Thanks.

Sure, my favorite topic is human evolution. Is that specific enough? I am glad there are some creationists here who know what they are doing. The last guy I was talking to wasn't all that good.

I personally view human evolution as the flimsiest link in evolution. In that there is so much difference in human and apes that phenotypical similarities are overridden. That, however, I will reserve for a debate proper.

I think something more specific than a resolution "human evolution" would be better.
Exterminate!!!!!!-Dalek.

The ability to speak does not make you a competent debater.

One does not simply do the rain dance.
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 9:09:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 8:42:34 PM, Muted wrote:
At 11/21/2012 8:31:17 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 8:19:54 PM, Muted wrote:
At 11/21/2012 7:17:52 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
There are only two people on this site who can do the subject justice, Heineken [http://www.debate.org...] who is the best on the site and medic0506 who can at least form arguments [http://www.debate.org...]. The Creationist guy above is frequently featured on the Weekly Stupid and has been a joke on this site since day 1.

Add the two people I mentioned as friends, then post on their walls or send them messages about creating a debate on the topic. The topic should be more specific than "Evolution vs. Creationism." It should be a resolution (e.g. Homo sapiens sapiens and chimpanzees share a common ancestor, or There have been observed instances of speciation).

Not me?! *Throws tantrum* :D
Heineken is a creationist? My impression is that he"s an evolutionist and that Dan4Reason wants to debate a creationist. Am I not right?


Anyway Dan, I would like to debate you on that. Just note that I currently have five debates running, so I might take awhile to respond. And like WSA said, please be specific (Since the range of topics is incredibly wide). I love specifics. Possibly a resolution such as ERVs support evolution via common descent, or antibody resistance support punctuated equilibrium, etc...
On another note, you shouldn"t place your arguments on this thread. This ideally should be a thread where people who want to debate you come to discuss the exact resolution, unless you prefer doing so in a PM.
I would prefer if, should you challenge me, to do so next week.

For the definition of evolution, I would have no problems with just "change over time," because that is what I believe as well. For a debate to be effective, it must be a particular type of change. Change that can theoretically transform a bacteria into a human, mutations leading to different genus, etc. This is because I do not believe speciation proves evolution (Which can itself be a subject of debate)

Thanks.

Sure, my favorite topic is human evolution. Is that specific enough? I am glad there are some creationists here who know what they are doing. The last guy I was talking to wasn't all that good.

I personally view human evolution as the flimsiest link in evolution. In that there is so much difference in human and apes that phenotypical similarities are overridden. That, however, I will reserve for a debate proper.

I think something more specific than a resolution "human evolution" would be better.

The main evidence for human evolution does not come from out simmilarity to chimpanzees. It comes from the fossil record. Just a hint at what I will be arguing.

Here is a good resolution:

"The genetic and fossil record evidence shows that humans and apes are related by a common ancestor."
Muted
Posts: 377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2012 11:44:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 9:09:52 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 8:42:34 PM, Muted wrote:
At 11/21/2012 8:31:17 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 8:19:54 PM, Muted wrote:
At 11/21/2012 7:17:52 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
There are only two people on this site who can do the subject justice, Heineken [http://www.debate.org...] who is the best on the site and medic0506 who can at least form arguments [http://www.debate.org...]. The Creationist guy above is frequently featured on the Weekly Stupid and has been a joke on this site since day 1.

Add the two people I mentioned as friends, then post on their walls or send them messages about creating a debate on the topic. The topic should be more specific than "Evolution vs. Creationism." It should be a resolution (e.g. Homo sapiens sapiens and chimpanzees share a common ancestor, or There have been observed instances of speciation).

Not me?! *Throws tantrum* :D
Heineken is a creationist? My impression is that he"s an evolutionist and that Dan4Reason wants to debate a creationist. Am I not right?


Anyway Dan, I would like to debate you on that. Just note that I currently have five debates running, so I might take awhile to respond. And like WSA said, please be specific (Since the range of topics is incredibly wide). I love specifics. Possibly a resolution such as ERVs support evolution via common descent, or antibody resistance support punctuated equilibrium, etc...
On another note, you shouldn"t place your arguments on this thread. This ideally should be a thread where people who want to debate you come to discuss the exact resolution, unless you prefer doing so in a PM.
I would prefer if, should you challenge me, to do so next week.

For the definition of evolution, I would have no problems with just "change over time," because that is what I believe as well. For a debate to be effective, it must be a particular type of change. Change that can theoretically transform a bacteria into a human, mutations leading to different genus, etc. This is because I do not believe speciation proves evolution (Which can itself be a subject of debate)

Thanks.

Sure, my favorite topic is human evolution. Is that specific enough? I am glad there are some creationists here who know what they are doing. The last guy I was talking to wasn't all that good.

I personally view human evolution as the flimsiest link in evolution. In that there is so much difference in human and apes that phenotypical similarities are overridden. That, however, I will reserve for a debate proper.

I think something more specific than a resolution "human evolution" would be better.

The main evidence for human evolution does not come from out simmilarity to chimpanzees. It comes from the fossil record. Just a hint at what I will be arguing.

Here is a good resolution:

"The genetic and fossil record evidence shows that humans and apes are related by a common ancestor."

A good resolution, as long as neither of us put red herrings into the debate. Do you want to write out the challenge or do you want me to? (Next week, still) 5 rounds, first for acceptance. as to the rest of the details, as long as it is 72 hours, I don't mind anything
Exterminate!!!!!!-Dalek.

The ability to speak does not make you a competent debater.

One does not simply do the rain dance.
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2012 3:31:58 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 3:24:10 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:28:44 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:19:22 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:03:43 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:01:18 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:42:37 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:37:27 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.

A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

I guess some people are not into debating. My evidences for evolution don't require any definition of kind specifically. Anyway, looking at your previous posts about evolution, you wouldn't be much of a challenge, no offense.

I've had plenty of debates (see my old account DATCMOTO)

What is your best evidence?

Ok. Maybe you know something about that particular topic. I don't have a best argument. One good argument comes from endogenous retroviruses. These are genetic sequences inserted by viruses into a human host that are passed down. We already know that humans and apes have many retroviruses. If evolution is true, humans and apes should share at least a few of these because we are related and inherited our DNA from a common ancestor.

In fact so far we have found 7 retrovirus sequences humans and apes share. We can form a family tree of apes by shared retroviruses, that looks like the overall genetic family tree. If evolution was not true, then it is improbable that humans and apes would have the exact same retrovirus insertions.

http://www.talkorigins.org...

Complete theory; there's a thousand reasons why we could share such viruses..

How do you deal with poly strata fossils?

You didn't really respond to my argument. If humans were created independently of apes, then viruses would have had to inserted almost the exact same sequences in the exact same places for both humans and chimps and have these inherited. This is highly improbable.

However we see these shared retroviruses in the entire class of apes. This just makes mere chance even more improbably. What is funny is that shared sequences among more distantly related apes, are also shared among more closely related apes. This perfectly fits what evolution predicts.

So please give me a likely explanation for this phenomenon, besides evolution of course.

I do not deny the physical similarities between man and apes, so however we attained the virus, is how they attained.. Out of how many viruses? Ever? That no longer exist? Someone's gotta win the lottery..
There are infinite variables with this stuff, which why it's a safe place to debate.

There are about 30,000 ERVS. So far we have found seven that we share with chimps. We are not close to have found every similarity so this number is an underestimate. In fact more modern estimates have pushed that number to 16 at least.

Retroviruses consist of many different Nucleotide sequences so the chance of the vast majority of them being the same is tiny even if you have 30,000.Remember, we have about 20,000 genes so to have two ERV's matching is incredibly small, and to have simmilar sequences is even smaller. To have 16 matching is just too improbable.


Compared to the improbability of what?

A singularity appearing out of nowhere and expanding and arranging itself into the universe?

Non living matter producing living cells?

You've got much bigger probabilities to worry about!

http://www.debate.org...

Before I explain polystrate fossils, which I will, how do you explain this curious phenomenon?

Nothing curious at all, the so called geologic column was layed down quickly in the great flood around 4000 yrs ago, something akin to putting mud in a jar of water and letting the layers settle.

Evolutionists say the layers are millions of years, old except when poly strata fossils are found, then they are not!

Old earth geology does not say that all layers are laid down over millions of years. Some are laid down very quickly, others very slowly. So if a flood could bury a tree in sediment in a young earth model, who says it can't happen in an old earth model?

Exactly! The ones we can't prove are young (without poly strata fossils) are old!

I wonder if there are any 'blind tests'? Taking rock samples from layers with poly strata fossils and ones without? I doubt it because the layers are dated by index fossils and the fossils by the layers; circular reasoning..

Or.. LOOPY.
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2012 5:48:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/22/2012 3:31:58 AM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 3:24:10 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:28:44 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:19:22 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:03:43 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:01:18 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:42:37 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:37:27 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.

A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

I guess some people are not into debating. My evidences for evolution don't require any definition of kind specifically. Anyway, looking at your previous posts about evolution, you wouldn't be much of a challenge, no offense.

I've had plenty of debates (see my old account DATCMOTO)

What is your best evidence?

Ok. Maybe you know something about that particular topic. I don't have a best argument. One good argument comes from endogenous retroviruses. These are genetic sequences inserted by viruses into a human host that are passed down. We already know that humans and apes have many retroviruses. If evolution is true, humans and apes should share at least a few of these because we are related and inherited our DNA from a common ancestor.

In fact so far we have found 7 retrovirus sequences humans and apes share. We can form a family tree of apes by shared retroviruses, that looks like the overall genetic family tree. If evolution was not true, then it is improbable that humans and apes would have the exact same retrovirus insertions.

http://www.talkorigins.org...

Complete theory; there's a thousand reasons why we could share such viruses..

How do you deal with poly strata fossils?

You didn't really respond to my argument. If humans were created independently of apes, then viruses would have had to inserted almost the exact same sequences in the exact same places for both humans and chimps and have these inherited. This is highly improbable.

However we see these shared retroviruses in the entire class of apes. This just makes mere chance even more improbably. What is funny is that shared sequences among more distantly related apes, are also shared among more closely related apes. This perfectly fits what evolution predicts.

So please give me a likely explanation for this phenomenon, besides evolution of course.

I do not deny the physical similarities between man and apes, so however we attained the virus, is how they attained.. Out of how many viruses? Ever? That no longer exist? Someone's gotta win the lottery..
There are infinite variables with this stuff, which why it's a safe place to debate.

There are about 30,000 ERVS. So far we have found seven that we share with chimps. We are not close to have found every similarity so this number is an underestimate. In fact more modern estimates have pushed that number to 16 at least.

Retroviruses consist of many different Nucleotide sequences so the chance of the vast majority of them being the same is tiny even if you have 30,000.Remember, we have about 20,000 genes so to have two ERV's matching is incredibly small, and to have simmilar sequences is even smaller. To have 16 matching is just too improbable.


Compared to the improbability of what?

A singularity appearing out of nowhere and expanding and arranging itself into the universe?

Non living matter producing living cells?

You've got much bigger probabilities to worry about!

Why do you think abiogenesis is improbable? Why do you think the big bang says that the universe appeared out of nowhere?

http://www.debate.org...

Before I explain polystrate fossils, which I will, how do you explain this curious phenomenon?

Nothing curious at all, the so called geologic column was layed down quickly in the great flood around 4000 yrs ago, something akin to putting mud in a jar of water and letting the layers settle.

Evolutionists say the layers are millions of years, old except when poly strata fossils are found, then they are not!

Old earth geology does not say that all layers are laid down over millions of years. Some are laid down very quickly, others very slowly. So if a flood could bury a tree in sediment in a young earth model, who says it can't happen in an old earth model?

Exactly! The ones we can't prove are young (without poly strata fossils) are old!

I wonder if there are any 'blind tests'? Taking rock samples from layers with poly strata fossils and ones without? I doubt it because the layers are dated by index fossils and the fossils by the layers; circular reasoning..

Or.. LOOPY.

How do you know that the strata the polystrate trees are found in built up slowly according to old earth geology. If they were found in flood strata or volcanic stata there is no reason to think that. The best way to tell is to date the strata.

And, by the way, that is not circular reasoning. Strata are dated by radiometric dating. Then we can tell how old the fossils in them are. Once we know the ages of different species because their strata, we can find the ages of other strata if we find the species in the strata. But remember, it is all based on radiometric dating.
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2012 5:49:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 11:44:19 PM, Muted wrote:
At 11/21/2012 9:09:52 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 8:42:34 PM, Muted wrote:
At 11/21/2012 8:31:17 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 8:19:54 PM, Muted wrote:
At 11/21/2012 7:17:52 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
There are only two people on this site who can do the subject justice, Heineken [http://www.debate.org...] who is the best on the site and medic0506 who can at least form arguments [http://www.debate.org...]. The Creationist guy above is frequently featured on the Weekly Stupid and has been a joke on this site since day 1.

Add the two people I mentioned as friends, then post on their walls or send them messages about creating a debate on the topic. The topic should be more specific than "Evolution vs. Creationism." It should be a resolution (e.g. Homo sapiens sapiens and chimpanzees share a common ancestor, or There have been observed instances of speciation).

Not me?! *Throws tantrum* :D
Heineken is a creationist? My impression is that he"s an evolutionist and that Dan4Reason wants to debate a creationist. Am I not right?


Anyway Dan, I would like to debate you on that. Just note that I currently have five debates running, so I might take awhile to respond. And like WSA said, please be specific (Since the range of topics is incredibly wide). I love specifics. Possibly a resolution such as ERVs support evolution via common descent, or antibody resistance support punctuated equilibrium, etc...
On another note, you shouldn"t place your arguments on this thread. This ideally should be a thread where people who want to debate you come to discuss the exact resolution, unless you prefer doing so in a PM.
I would prefer if, should you challenge me, to do so next week.

For the definition of evolution, I would have no problems with just "change over time," because that is what I believe as well. For a debate to be effective, it must be a particular type of change. Change that can theoretically transform a bacteria into a human, mutations leading to different genus, etc. This is because I do not believe speciation proves evolution (Which can itself be a subject of debate)

Thanks.

Sure, my favorite topic is human evolution. Is that specific enough? I am glad there are some creationists here who know what they are doing. The last guy I was talking to wasn't all that good.

I personally view human evolution as the flimsiest link in evolution. In that there is so much difference in human and apes that phenotypical similarities are overridden. That, however, I will reserve for a debate proper.

I think something more specific than a resolution "human evolution" would be better.

The main evidence for human evolution does not come from out simmilarity to chimpanzees. It comes from the fossil record. Just a hint at what I will be arguing.

Here is a good resolution:

"The genetic and fossil record evidence shows that humans and apes are related by a common ancestor."

A good resolution, as long as neither of us put red herrings into the debate. Do you want to write out the challenge or do you want me to? (Next week, still) 5 rounds, first for acceptance. as to the rest of the details, as long as it is 72 hours, I don't mind anything

Since the debate is next week, lets worry about all that on Tuesday.
truthseeker613
Posts: 464
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2012 6:23:48 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 7:17:52 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
There are only two people on this site who can do the subject justice, Heineken [http://www.debate.org...] who is the best on the site and medic0506 who can at least form arguments [http://www.debate.org...]. The Creationist guy above is frequently featured on the Weekly Stupid and has been a joke on this site since day 1.

Add the two people I mentioned as friends, then post on their walls or send them messages about creating a debate on the topic. The topic should be more specific than "Evolution vs. Creationism." It should be a resolution (e.g. Homo sapiens sapiens and chimpanzees share a common ancestor, or There have been observed instances of speciation).

You left out Muted?
http://www.nydailynews.com...

royalpaladin: I'd rather support people who kill spies than a nation that organizes assassination squads (Kidon) to illegally enter into other nations and kill anybody who is not a Zionist. Who knows when they'll kill me for the crime of not supporting Israel?

Koopin: LOL! I just imagine Royal sitting in here apartment at night, when suddenly she hears a man outside speaking Hebrew as sh
truthseeker613
Posts: 464
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2012 6:25:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/21/2012 8:19:54 PM, Muted wrote:
At 11/21/2012 7:17:52 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
There are only two people on this site who can do the subject justice, Heineken [http://www.debate.org...] who is the best on the site and medic0506 who can at least form arguments [http://www.debate.org...]. The Creationist guy above is frequently featured on the Weekly Stupid and has been a joke on this site since day 1.

Add the two people I mentioned as friends, then post on their walls or send them messages about creating a debate on the topic. The topic should be more specific than "Evolution vs. Creationism." It should be a resolution (e.g. Homo sapiens sapiens and chimpanzees share a common ancestor, or There have been observed instances of speciation).

Not me?! *Throws tantrum* :D

LOL.
http://www.nydailynews.com...

royalpaladin: I'd rather support people who kill spies than a nation that organizes assassination squads (Kidon) to illegally enter into other nations and kill anybody who is not a Zionist. Who knows when they'll kill me for the crime of not supporting Israel?

Koopin: LOL! I just imagine Royal sitting in here apartment at night, when suddenly she hears a man outside speaking Hebrew as sh
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2012 10:55:58 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/22/2012 6:23:48 AM, truthseeker613 wrote:
You left out Muted?

Yes, I did. I mentioned the people on the site who could do the subject justice, meaning argue the subject well. Muted cannot do that, so I left him out of the list for obvious reasons.

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
DanielChristopherBlowes
Posts: 1,066
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2012 4:30:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/22/2012 5:48:00 AM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/22/2012 3:31:58 AM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 3:24:10 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:28:44 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:19:22 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:03:43 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 2:01:18 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:42:37 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:37:27 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 11/21/2012 1:26:22 PM, DanielChristopherBlowes wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:45:47 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
Hello, I was wondering if any creationists out there want to debate evolution and creationism. If so challenge me or ask to be challenged. I will be debating for evolution.

A complete waste of time; it will all come down to semantic gymnastics: 'define kind' etc

I guess some people are not into debating. My evidences for evolution don't require any definition of kind specifically. Anyway, looking at your previous posts about evolution, you wouldn't be much of a challenge, no offense.

I've had plenty of debates (see my old account DATCMOTO)

What is your best evidence?

Ok. Maybe you know something about that particular topic. I don't have a best argument. One good argument comes from endogenous retroviruses. These are genetic sequences inserted by viruses into a human host that are passed down. We already know that humans and apes have many retroviruses. If evolution is true, humans and apes should share at least a few of these because we are related and inherited our DNA from a common ancestor.

In fact so far we have found 7 retrovirus sequences humans and apes share. We can form a family tree of apes by shared retroviruses, that looks like the overall genetic family tree. If evolution was not true, then it is improbable that humans and apes would have the exact same retrovirus insertions.

http://www.talkorigins.org...

Complete theory; there's a thousand reasons why we could share such viruses..

How do you deal with poly strata fossils?

You didn't really respond to my argument. If humans were created independently of apes, then viruses would have had to inserted almost the exact same sequences in the exact same places for both humans and chimps and have these inherited. This is highly improbable.

However we see these shared retroviruses in the entire class of apes. This just makes mere chance even more improbably. What is funny is that shared sequences among more distantly related apes, are also shared among more closely related apes. This perfectly fits what evolution predicts.

So please give me a likely explanation for this phenomenon, besides evolution of course.

I do not deny the physical similarities between man and apes, so however we attained the virus, is how they attained.. Out of how many viruses? Ever? That no longer exist? Someone's gotta win the lottery..
There are infinite variables with this stuff, which why it's a safe place to debate.

There are about 30,000 ERVS. So far we have found seven that we share with chimps. We are not close to have found every similarity so this number is an underestimate. In fact more modern estimates have pushed that number to 16 at least.

Retroviruses consist of many different Nucleotide sequences so the chance of the vast majority of them being the same is tiny even if you have 30,000.Remember, we have about 20,000 genes so to have two ERV's matching is incredibly small, and to have simmilar sequences is even smaller. To have 16 matching is just too improbable.


Compared to the improbability of what?

A singularity appearing out of nowhere and expanding and arranging itself into the universe?

Non living matter producing living cells?

You've got much bigger probabilities to worry about!

Why do you think abiogenesis is improbable? Why do you think the big bang says that the universe appeared out of nowhere?

http://www.debate.org...

Before I explain polystrate fossils, which I will, how do you explain this curious phenomenon?

Nothing curious at all, the so called geologic column was layed down quickly in the great flood around 4000 yrs ago, something akin to putting mud in a jar of water and letting the layers settle.

Evolutionists say the layers are millions of years, old except when poly strata fossils are found, then they are not!

Old earth geology does not say that all layers are laid down over millions of years. Some are laid down very quickly, others very slowly. So if a flood could bury a tree in sediment in a young earth model, who says it can't happen in an old earth model?

Exactly! The ones we can't prove are young (without poly strata fossils) are old!

I wonder if there are any 'blind tests'? Taking rock samples from layers with poly strata fossils and ones without? I doubt it because the layers are dated by index fossils and the fossils by the layers; circular reasoning..

Or.. LOOPY.

How do you know that the strata the polystrate trees are found in built up slowly according to old earth geology. If they were found in flood strata or volcanic stata there is no reason to think that. The best way to tell is to date the strata.

And, by the way, that is not circular reasoning. Strata are dated by radiometric dating. Then we can tell how old the fossils in them are. Once we know the ages of different species because their strata, we can find the ages of other strata if we find the species in the strata. But remember, it is all based on radiometric dating.

Do you know of a blind test?

Do you know of all the false positives in radiometric dating?
Everyone on the side of Truth listens to Me. (Jesus Christ)