The Instigator
Christfollower
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
killshot
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Does evolution Exist?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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: 3/6/2019 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 702 times Debate No: 120662
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

Christfollower

Con

Does evolution exist? I don't think so.
1st round is acceptance only.
2nd round is opening statements.
3rd and 4th round are rebuttals.
5th round is closing statements.
killshot

Pro

You seem nice and likeable :)

That being said, I am very hesitent to accept this debate, Because I have seen your arguments on evolution already and they are very wrong. The stuff I've seen is the same old regurgitated Answers in Gensis stuff that's been debunked dozens of times and doesn't stand up to peer review or scientific consensus. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and hopefully this can be a productive discussion/debate.

I accept, Dispite my reservations haha.

I'll await your opening argument.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
killshot

Pro

According to the most-widely accepted theory of evolution today, The sole mechanism for producing evolution is that of random mutation combined with natural selection.

Your very first sentence is already incorrect. Mutations and natural selection are not the sole source of evolutionary change, There are other forces including gene flow and genetic drift (especially in smaller populations). This is a very common error of ignorance made by apologists, Along with their erroneous and baseless mathematical probabilities surrounding it. This is incorrect, And this argument has been refuted many times already.

Skipping to your next argument:

a) Evolution is the accumulation of changes in allele frequencies over time, Time being a delta for the observer's frame of reference. There are no differences between micro and macro evolution except time; it's simply a conceptual distinction made by looking at evolution from a larger delta time. Mutations can cause genetic changes, Either good or bad, Which can introduce new alleles into a population. Reproduction between semi-separated populations can lead to gene flow, Which can introduce new alleles into one population from another population. Genetic drifting can also occur when isolated populations become separated and genetics begin to drift away from one another. All of this combined with other pressures and selection, Either artificial or natural, Will determine which genes get passed on and which ones don't. This is evolution, And it happens constantly. This is demonstrable and it has been observed and documented both in the field and in the lab numerous times.

If you disagree with this, Please explain in detail why.

I'm stopping here because it's clear you're just repeating the normal creationist BS that everyone, Including myself have already refuted a thousand times. There is nothing new here in your arguments, They do not hold up to scientific peer review, And the scientific consensus disagrees with you. It's clear you do not have a solid foundation in evolution and this is a waste of time.


Debate Round No. 2
Christfollower

Con

"I'm stopping here because it's clear you're just repeating the normal creationist BS that everyone, Including myself, Have already refuted a thousand times. "
-I challenge my opponent to refute it. You can't just say that is false without evidence.

"Mutations and natural selection are not the sole source of evolutionary change, There are other forces including gene flow and genetic drift (especially in smaller populations). "
-I have researched many evolution websites and found out that natural selection and genetic drift are the most important parts of evolution. I apologize for missing 1 part of the prosses.

"This is a very common error of ignorance made by apologists, Along with their erroneous and baseless mathematical probabilities surrounding it. "
-Again, I challenge my opponent to refute this argument.

"There are no differences between micro and macro evolution except time; it's simply a conceptual distinction made by looking at evolution from a larger delta time. "
-The reason microevolution does not lead to macroevolution is that microevolution only involves variations based upon existing genes. No new genetic information is being added.

"This is demonstrable and it has been observed and documented both in the field and in the lab numerous times. "
There are no scientific studies observing evolution. No one has seen one living thing, Turn into a completely different living thing. E. G. Apes to humans.

Now I will continue my argument. My opponent has the dreadful task of debunking EVERY one of these arguments. If not, There is a reasonable doubt that evolution happened.
How did life originate? Evolutionist Professor Paul Davies admitted, "Nobody knows how a mixture of lifeless chemicals spontaneously organized themselves into the first living cell. "Andrew Knoll, Professor of biology, Harvard, Said, "we don"t really know how life originated on this planet". A minimal cell needs several hundred proteins. Even if every atom in the universe were an experiment with all the correct amino acids present for every possible molecular vibration in the supposed evolutionary age of the universe, Not even one average-sized functional protein would form. So how did life with hundreds of proteins originate just by chemistry without intelligent design?

How did the DNA code originate? The code is a sophisticated language system with letters and words where the meaning of the words is unrelated to the chemical properties of the letters"just as the information on this page is not a product of the chemical properties of the ink (or pixels on a screen). What other coding system has existed without intelligent design? How did the DNA coding system arise without it being created?

How could mutations"accidental copying mistakes (DNA "letters" exchanged, Deleted or added, Genes duplicated, Chromosome inversions, Etc. )"create the huge volumes of information in the DNA of living things? How could such errors create 3 billion letters of DNA information to change a microbe into a microbiologist? There is information for how to make proteins but also for controlling their use"much like a cookbook contains the ingredients as well as the instructions for how and when to use them. One without the other is useless. See: Meta-information: An impossible conundrum for evolution. Mutations are known for their destructive effects, Including over 1, 000 human diseases such as hemophilia. Rarely are they even helpful. But how can scrambling existing DNA information create a new biochemical pathway or nano-machines with many components, To make "goo-to-you" evolution possible? E. G. , How did a 32-component rotary motor like ATP synthase (which produces the energy currency, ATP, For all life), Or robots like kinesin (a "postman" delivering parcels inside cells) originate?

Why is natural selection, A principle recognized by creationists, Taught as "evolution", As if it explains the origin of the diversity of life? By definition it is a selective process (selecting from already existing information), So is not a creative process. It might explain the survival of the fittest (why certain genes benefit creatures more in certain environments), But not the arrival of the fittest (where the genes and creatures came from in the first place). The death of individuals not adapted to an environment and the survival of those that are suited does not explain the origin of the traits that make an organism adapted to an environment. E. G. , How do minor back-and-forth variations in finch beaks explain the origin of beaks or finches? How does natural selection explain goo-to-you evolution?

How did new biochemical pathways, Which involve multiple enzymes working together in sequence, Originate? Every pathway and nano-machine requires multiple protein/enzyme components to work. How did lucky accidents create even one of the components, Let alone 10 or 20 or 30 at the same time, Often in a necessary programmed sequence. Evolutionary biochemist Franklin Harold wrote, "we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, Only a variety of wishful speculations. "

Living things look like they were designed, So how do evolutionists know that they were not designed? Richard Dawkins wrote, "biology is the study of complicated things that have the appearance of having been designed with a purpose. " Francis Crick, The co-discoverer of the double helix structure of DNA, Wrote, "Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, But rather evolved. "The problem for evolutionists is that living things show too much design. Who objects when an archaeologist says that pottery points to human design? Yet if someone attributes the design in living things to a designer, That is not acceptable. Why should science be restricted to naturalistic causes rather than logical causes?

How did multi-cellular life originate? How did cells adapted to individual survival "learn" to cooperate and specialize (including undergoing programmed cell death) to create complex plants and animals?

How did sex originate? Asexual reproduction gives up to twice as much reproductive success ("fitness") for the same resources as sexual reproduction, So how could the latter ever gain enough advantage to be selected? And how could mere physics and chemistry invent the complementary apparatuses needed at the same time (non-intelligent processes cannot plan for future coordination of male and female organs).

Why are the (expected) countless millions of transitional fossils missing? Darwin noted the problem and it still remains. The evolutionary family trees in textbooks are based on imagination, Not fossil evidence. Famous Harvard paleontologist (and evolutionist), Stephen Jay Gould, Wrote, "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology". Other evolutionist fossil experts also acknowledge the problem.
How do "living fossils" remain unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years, If evolution has changed worms into humans in the same time frame? Professor Gould wrote, "the maintenance of stability within species must be considered as a major evolutionary problem. "

How did blind chemistry create mind/ intelligence, Meaning, Altruism and morality? If everything evolved, And we invented God, As per evolutionary teaching, What purpose or meaning is there to human life? Should students be learning nihilism (life is meaningless) in science classes?

Why is evolutionary "just-so" story-telling tolerated? Evolutionists often use flexible story-telling to "explain" observations contrary to evolutionary theory. NAS(USA) member Dr Philip Skell wrote, "Darwinian explanations for such things are often too supple: Natural selection makes humans self-centered and aggressive"except when it makes them altruistic and peaceable. Or natural selection produces virile men who eagerly spread their seed"except when it prefers men who are faithful protectors and providers. When an explanation is so supple that it can explain any behavior, It is difficult to test it experimentally, Much less use it as a catalyst for scientific discovery. "
Where are the scientific breakthroughs due to evolution? Dr Marc Kirschner, Chair of the Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, Stated: "In fact, Over the last 100 years, Almost all of biology has proceeded independent of evolution, Except evolutionary biology itself. Molecular biology, Biochemistry, Physiology, Have not taken evolution into account at all. "Dr Skell wrote, "It is our knowledge of how these organisms actually operate, Not speculations about how they may have arisen millions of years ago, That is essential to doctors, Veterinarians, Farmers ". " Evolution actually hinders medical discovery. Then why do schools and universities teach evolution so dogmatically, Stealing time from experimental biology that so benefits humankind?

Science involves experimenting to figure out how things work; how they operate. Why is evolution, A theory about history, Taught as if it is the same as this operational science? You cannot do experiments, Or even observe what happened, In the past. Asked if evolution has been observed, Richard Dawkins said, "Evolution has been observed. It"s just that it hasn"t been observed while it"s happening. "

If my opponent can not answer these questions, Then there is reasonable doubt that evolution did not happen.
killshot

Pro

Once again, You make baseless and incorrect assertions.

There are no scientific studies observing evolution. No one has seen one living thing, Turn into a completely different living thing. E. G. Apes to humans.

Here is one of the numerous examples – Galapagos Finches. I chose this one, Because it's simple and the page is a quick and easy read. Another observation is fruit flies, Which reproduce rapidly. There are so many documented examples, A quick Google search can find you several. I would recommend you take the free evolution course at Berkeley University. It would help you understand this subject much better.

https://evolution. Berkeley. Edu/evolibrary/news/100201_speciation

Humans are Apes (Hominoids), In the same way we are Great Apes (Hominids), As well as Hominines, Hominins, Homininans and Homo Sapiens (our present species). If you are referring to Gorillas, For example, Then no, We are not descended from Gorillas, But we share a common ancestor (Hominines). We are not descended from Chimpanzees either, They are our cousins, But we share a common ancestor (Hominins). A species can never give birth to a different species, That's not how speciation works. That being said, A species can never escape its parent clade either, Which is why Homo Sapiens are also Hominins and many other parent species as you work your way back up the phylogenetic tree.

Another example is a dog. A dog is not descended from modern wolves, But they do share a common ancestor. It was long thought that dogs were descended from gray wolves, But that was later disproven by genomic sequencing. Even if dogs continue to speciate, Which they likely will, Either by artificial or natural selection, The new species will always be a sub clade within its parent clade. This is why the examples of crocoduck and other ridiculous claims are so absurd and have no basis in science. One species cannot give rise to another species from a different clade, Genetics are inherited.

When you are speaking in relation to evolution, There are many mechanics at play. Mutations (copy errors) cause genetic variation introducing new alleles, But those alleles are passed on and coalesced through forces like genetic drift and gene flow. All of this, Combined with selection (artificial or natural) will lead to allele diversity, Which leads to change. Isolated populations often lead to speciation. This is fact. This is observed and documented. When you multiply allele changes by a delta time you will see more or less variation, Depending on the amount of time in reference.

There are many things you missed in your shotgun attempt at our debate, And many other things you just got entirely wrong. It's very evident you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when it comes to evolution and biology, And I see no point in going any further with this debate.

It's not a debate when the opponent has no formal education in this subject, And just copies and pastes creationist arguments while spamming "I challenge you to prove it wrong". There is no point. We cannot have a detailed conversation on the subject, Because you do not understand the subject. A debate platform is not a good place to educate someone in a field as vast as biology; it's intended for debating, Not education. This is why I was hesitant to accept this debate and aforementioned my reservations.

Debate Round No. 3
Christfollower

Con

Christfollower forfeited this round.
killshot

Pro

killshot forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Christfollower

Con

Christfollower forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Christfollower 3 years ago
Christfollower
the link in my last rd is not working.
here is a working one.
https://www. Discovery. Org/m/2019/02/A-Scientific-Dissent-from-Darwinism-List-020419. Pdf
Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago
melcharaz
im not making a point, Just an observation.
Posted by killshot 3 years ago
killshot
@melcharaz - Can you elaborate more on your point? Haha
Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago
melcharaz
https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=z6kgvhG3AkI

i think they mention the finches you are talking about in this debate.
Posted by Christfollower 3 years ago
Christfollower
DDO has lots of bugs and stuff to fix
Posted by killshot 3 years ago
killshot
Ya, I'm seeing missing arguments too from stuff you already posted. . Something got messed up
Posted by Christfollower 3 years ago
Christfollower
Its not letting my post my argument. Just resets the timer
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.