The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Evolution (Pro) VS. Literal Creationism

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/20/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,784 times Debate No: 59266
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




BOP is shared. First round is for acceptance. Good luck!


I accept. Good luck to you too!
Debate Round No. 1



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.

Case 2: Adam And Eve

The Bible self-destructs with everything science has taught us. The science of forensics disproves Adam and Eve 100 times over. If we are from Adam and Eve, We would practically be cousins with everyone in the world! No. This is scientifically impossible. Instead, forensics states that we are not all related. Adam and Eve also don't explain race. If we are all descendants from Adam and Eve, we would all be one race. Adam and Eve states they have two sons, Kain and Abel, but, WHERE THE HELL ARE THE GIRLS?!???!? They must have had something to repopulate with. It is also said Adam and eve knew how to speak, but even cavemen had no idea of the simplest languages! Wouldn't Adam and Eve have taught their children to speak their language? They also say that Adam and Eve eat from the tree of knowledge, yet, man has never found a tree that give knowledge of everything in the universe! The tree had a fruit, which means it probably had seeds, which would have made other trees similar to it, giving infinite knowledge of everything. They also say that the snake spoke at one time, yet, the snake has no vocal cords! (5) There is also evidence that the Earth is older than 4,000 years. Human footprints believed to be 40,000 years old have actually been older! It is 51,000 years old. (3) Even a tree shows the Earth is older than 4,000 years! (4) That is all Adam and Eve should be taken as. A story.







JasperFrancisShickadance forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


FF equalls a seven drop! I win!


Yes you do. Would you like to retry the debate possibly? Sorry, I have been extremely busy the past week :(
Debate Round No. 3


Okay soon.


I'll instigate. The name of it will be: Evolution (Pro) VS. Literal Creationism (Con) PART ll
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by tahir.imanov 7 years ago
At least define what you mean by evolution and literal creationism. Is it biblical, Hindu, or Martian.
Posted by JasperFrancisShickadance 7 years ago
I might accept...later...
Posted by Burncastle 7 years ago
Try just defending evolution, you will get more responses (and a more interesting debate).
Posted by Zarroette 7 years ago
Lol, truism-sniper.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct for the forfeits, and arguments for the unrebutted case. It seemed Con even conceded, but also asked for a "re-do"--if that's intended to make this a nulled debate (and scoreless), if Pro messages me I'll null the vote as it's his prerogative. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.

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