Evolution (Pro) VS. Literal Creationism (Con)
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
Cooldudebro
| Voting Style: | Open | Point System: | 7 Point | ||
| Started: | 7/25/2014 | Category: | Religion | ||
| Updated: | 7 years ago | Status: | Post Voting Period | ||
| Viewed: | 2,466 times | Debate No: | 59527 | ||
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (29)
Votes (5)
 Con |
 |
 Pro DEFINITION: Evolution Definitions: a process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse to a higher, more complex, or better Case 1: Proving Evolution First, I would like to prove how evolution is real. In a shocking discovery, we share 98.6% of our DNA with an ape. (1) if you click into link, you can barely tell the ape and human chromosome apart! Yet, when you compare it to a mouse's chromosomes, you can clearly see the difference. This proves that the ape and humans are greatly related. This proves evolution. Still not satisfied? Well, we should prove evolution using man's best friend. It is proven we share 5% of our genome sequence with dogs and mouse. (2) this again proves evolution. Even dogs and mice have a scientific similarity!  Here you can see the images of the human, mouse, and ape chromosomes. As you can see, this points towards evolution, as you can barely see the difference between the human and ape chromosome, but you can clearly see the difference between the mouse and the human.  Here you can see the similarities of our brain. However, you will see our brain is considerably larger. This gives us the power to communicate and give us a sense of right and wrong.  Here you may see how the skulls start out with a little similarities, but then has a bigger and bigger resemblance  Here you can see the beginnings and current human skulls. When you look at the first one, you see it is very different. It then gradually evolves into the human skull we know today. Evolution is still happening today! For instance, a women in the past could ovulate if she was too skiny. Now they can't! (3) 1.http://www.amnh.org... 2.http://news.nationalgeographic.com... 3. http://content.time.com... Con the belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution. I. Proving Creationism: Genesis 1 Genesis 1:1- in the beginning "GOD" created the heavens and the earth. It's God who was in the Beginning and is responsible for time that started. The infinite intelligence of God caused everything to be what it is today. How, He spoke; a. "let there be Light" (Genesis 1:3), b. "let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters" (Genesis 1: 6), c. "let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place and let the dry land appear" & "let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees eating fruit in which is their seed, each according to it's kind, on the earth" (Genesis 1:11) e. "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years, and let them be signs and seasons, and for days and years and let them be in lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth" (Genesis 1:14-15) f. "Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let the birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens" (Genesis 1:20) g. "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds-- livestock and creeping things and beasts of the according to their kinds" &"let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the gosh of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth" (Genesis 1:24 &26) In every one of these things, God did in a orderly fashion and were all done in a day and night span of 6 days as recorded after each event occurred. If creation isn't real, then how can each active occurrence have taken place by an infinite intelligent Being "God"? II. Today's generation: Nature 1. Lights -the sun, moon, stars 2. Plants- Trees, grass, flowers 3. Animals/insects- Birds, fish, beasts, bugs, humans These things today are quite similar to what the Bible talks about from Genesis 1, so therefore it must be that some intelligent form of Being (God) must have created everything or it wouldn't be exactly what it is today as was describe from years ago through the text of Scripture. Another object I want to point out is that God through the Bible uses analogies to still speak with Authority as He did when He created the universe and everything in it. I will now wait for my opponents rebuttals. Best wishes! [English Standard English Bible (ESV)] (Sorry, I would have posted up pictures and other things if it had not been I using my phone to type my argument). |
 |
|
Pro I honestly feel like I have nothing to refute here. You are using the bible to prove the bible. I haven't seen a bigger fallacy. You also post no links to your arguments. You also didn't refute any of my claims. you need to be scientific to win this debate. Your debate arguments have no scientific validity. I await your response. Con GodChoosesLife forfeited this round. |
 |
|
Pro Con GodChoosesLife forfeited this round. |
 |
|
Con |
 |
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Mister_Man 7 years ago
| Cooldudebro | GodChoosesLife | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: |  | - | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | | - | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | | - | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | | - | - | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | | - | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 7 | 0 |
Reasons for voting decision: Con tried to prove the Bible with the Bible.
Vote Placed by Sagey 7 years ago
| Cooldudebro | GodChoosesLife | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | | - | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | | - | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 6 | 0 |
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited and Pro produced some great sources.
Vote Placed by lannan13 7 years ago
| Cooldudebro | GodChoosesLife | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | | - | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | | - | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 6 | 0 |
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture.
Vote Placed by Progressivist 7 years ago
| Cooldudebro | GodChoosesLife | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | | - | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | | - | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 6 | 0 |
Reasons for voting decision: forfeited!
Vote Placed by Splenic_Warrior 7 years ago
| Cooldudebro | GodChoosesLife | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | | - | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | | - | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | | - | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | | - | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 6 | 0 |
Reasons for voting decision: RFD is pretty obvious; Pro actually provided an argument, with sources. Con loses conduct for the forfeit.
I accuse you of not understanding evolution not because you pointed out holes (which you didn't. You had no rebuttal to my refutation of your arguments) but because you continually say things like we evolved from monkies. We didn't evolve from monkies. Everyone knows we didn't evolve from monkies. That's not what evolution is.
The god of the gaps argument is millennia old. Every time you guys say that something is one way and we prove that it isn't, you shift the goal posts and pick something else we haven't had enough time to conclusively study yet, and say that it is evidence for the existence of god. Then we disprove your new argument, and you shift the goalposts again. The same story goes here. Just because we don't know right now doesn't mean we'll never find out. The earth is flat on the sun goes around the earth.
My own words: "I hear, 'Just because there is nothing to fill that gap, does not mean that it was God.' If it were not God, then what could it have been, seeing that there is no evidence to prove a different source?"
Now tell me this. Who makes money out of concocting religion? Where is more money going to be made?
Saying "I don't know" doesn't mean god did it. This is the god of the gaps fallacy.
As for your second statement, saying something like "when the first human arose" demonstrated your lack of understanding. Before you say evolution is false, at least take the time to learn what evolution is first.
"The educational system teaches children not to think. Any student who uses logic and solid scientific evidence to question the Theory of Evolution is ridiculed and insulted into submission. The students who submit become non-thinking robots who dare not question the dogma presented. ...-results in children who are unable to think logically, scientifically, and accurately."
b) egg and sperm cells carry the genetic information of their host. They do not adapt to environment because they are non-living, the same way red blood cells do not adapt to their environment.
c) no person with an understanding of evolution could claim that anyone ever said we evolved from monkies.
d) you are wrong. People with Down's Syndrome can have children: [http://www.downs-syndrome.org.uk...]
e) stop reading Christian propaganda leaflets and read an actual peer-reviewed journal.
When the first 'human-like' being arose, it could have only been one individual. How would that individual have been able to reproduce unless it's complementary partner appeared/evolved at the same time, an almost impossible situation, scientifically and mathematically?
How did multicellular organisms originate; how did multiple cells learn to cooperate to benefit the organism, and even use processes like apoptosis?
When did sexual reproduction start to be favored and expand? Asexual reproduction is twice as successful as sexual reproduction- more individuals survive- so when would the latter gain the advantage to be favored?