The Instigator
darkwolf
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
FollowerofChrist1955
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Is there any evidence for creation?

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 1 vote the winner is...
darkwolf
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/3/2018 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,361 times Debate No: 113466
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (33)
Votes (1)

 

darkwolf

Con

I know I already did one that was basically the same topic as this but now that I know my away around the site better I want to try again.
Rules,
No insults
Provide evidence for your claim ( links )
Address any fallacies that are called out throughout the debate.
And provide concrete evidence ... " because god!" is not concrete evidence, you'll need to provide world accepted scientific articles.

Let the games begin
FollowerofChrist1955

Pro

Today we live in a world of fantasy, illusion. The greatest minds of Science readily admit this yet fail to understand by reason and lack of understanding the immense truth of their statement.

Science through experimentation now knows that animal and Human Life should not exist on Earth at all! Through their attempts to prove some form or method of natural formation of creature Life. The Failure of each method tested to actually produce a real air-breathing creature Life at all, dramatically demonstrated in real-time that there was nor is a method oe way for REAL living walking, talking animal life to form through any natural process! This failure unwittingly proved beyond all doubt, that Real Living animal and Human life did not form naturally.

Science realizing that the theory of the primordial ooze didn"t happen in reality. In short SCIENCE ABANDONED attempts to PROVE the Origin of Life all together!

This is why Science no longer mentions the origin of Life at all. Unable to provide the evidence of natural formation of Creature life, destroys in totality the Theory's of evolution in its entirety.

to prove this: The Challenge that has been unanswered for 2 years already is:

PROVIDE one Scientific evidence of fact revealing the creation of a Living/air breathing/ procreation animal created under evolutionary experimentation proving the Origin of actual Real Living creature life in OUR Reality and realm.

It cannot be microscopic, because animal Life/Human Life is in THIS realm. Babies are born of all creatures in THIS realm, and it is THIS realm that is in the truest sense TRUE LIFE! as demonstrated by gnats, ants, to elephants and whales! Each animal exists in THIS reality not in the unseen realm.

their distinction in Animal/Human Life have babies that are not microscopic and produce offspring that are:

a. uniquely individual, not the same.

b. chemically different in DNA meaning distinguishable from others of their kind.

c. Are birthed by OVA production from ADULT individual.


where as organsims are:

a. completely and chemically the SAME.

b. differentiation is considered abnormal as MUTATION?

c. NOT born as babies but divided cells of itself, with identical attributes and chemical composition!

If you cannot show this then debate IS done. Creation by supernatural means IS PROVED! More than that requires research on your part, as the rest of the 2.2 Billion Souls on earth (identified as Christians) already KNOW. We can develop it for you? yes, but only you can research it from your own PERSONAL standpoint!

Reasonable and logical human reasoning dictates- further research to ascertain Human existence, since Science has failed to produce a reasoned response!


Thus we must look beyond the scientific and the Natural neither of which was capable of providing an answer!

Here is the available evidence:

Animal and Human Life is here?

it has been proven scientifically that we cannot FORM through any natural means nor methods?

We we PLACED HERE is obvious?
Debate Round No. 1
darkwolf

Con

There is no other realm, Bacteria and other microorganisms inhabit the same space we do and if there is so much evidence for creation why are you so quick to say what examples I can and can't use? Further more what makes your story right, and not the Muslim, Hindu, Viking, and Scientologist story of creation true? And this is a debate about whether creation has evidence which means you'll need to provide for mentioned evidence. So please try to stay on topic and really try to be scientific like I said in the rules, widely accepted scientific articles are needed for your evidence. Like I said please give evidence and links, our opinion is not included in those accepted articles. Oh and everything starts off microscopic, and grows by cell division. So I'll let you think on that until next time.
FollowerofChrist1955

Pro

Hahahaha

Couldn't answer the question RIGHT? Don't feel bad junior ... not even Dawkins or Stephen Hawking CAN answer it! Course is this Debate design to FIND the TRUTH, or just opinions? I mean, Opinions are like rear ends, everyone HAS one and their ALL full of ... well, you know.

The DIFFERENCE between me and you? I HAVE the REAL TRUTH, while you have lies, imagination and opinions which 100% of cannot be proven. While Science itself proved mine!

which is why you can't anwer the question and just came back whining?

As Grandma used to say, ONLY a smacked Dog Howls.

S.M.A.C.K. O.W.W.W.W.W.W.W hehehe

so your going with imagination and NO PROOF huh?

Well, I HAVE shown you THE PROOF by scientific experimentation from Darwin to Dawkins ... that Animal Life cannot BE created by NATURAL MEANS. HENCE your and everyone else's inability to ANSWER the question!

and as for your whining about bacteria?

Bacteria divides and becomes an identical of itself in composition and properties.
NO ANIMAL LIFE DOES THAT. every offspring is unique to itself, each time EVERY TIME!

THAT is why you cannot claim them as LIFE. Your in school you should know this?
Offspring are created by OVA (EGG) ONLY.

Bacteria, and micro-organsims DO NOT! reason they are NOT LIFE #2.


study up before responding please!
Debate Round No. 2
darkwolf

Con

Do bacteria eat? do they reproduce? Do they move?, by all means bacteria are living organism like I said scientific please, and I like how you tried to turn this debate on me you are debating creation but having given evidence for it, this debate isn't about evolution it's about creation, maybe you should put on your glasses? And If you have the proof show it give me a link, and for what defines life. The current definition is that organisms maintain homeostasis, are composed of cells, undergo metabolism, can grow, adapt to their environment, respond to stimuli, and reproduce. And what about identical twins, they are not unique from each other, so does that mean they are not true life? And yes I'm in school you may want to join me here after seeing what you just said you may need to brush up on your basic biology. And no you haven't shown me any evidence you made your opinion known without any other material to back it up. Give me a scientific article or I'll just assume you don't know how to read. And really imagination tell me which sounds more like something a child would come up with

" A magic being that no one has seen or heard in hundreds of years created the world through magical means, its origins are a mystery" in case your wondering I just got that off the back of a book I found in the library but it seems to draw some parallels doesn't it? And give me the quote on quote science that has proven your god but not the thousands other cultures have worshiped throughout history, I dare you to try ( I doubt you will though considering your previous comment had 0 links to your sources, 0 evidence to back it up. Due to your lack of reading skills, inability to provide links to your "scientific sources" and since you made up half of your argument stating you had evidence but without providing it, I'm going to assume you were home schooled by like minded individuals which would explain why you find it so hard to understand what defines a living organism, and your clear miss understanding of evidence, and why your a "former" nurse if that's true it's pretty easy to lie on the internet as you seem adapt at doing. So let's try to see some links this go around old timer, and if you don't know how I'm sure those 2 kids your home schooling could do it for you.
FollowerofChrist1955

Pro

So basically you got nothing. I give you evidence and you dazzle us with your opinions.

Got it! Hehehe
Debate Round No. 3
darkwolf

Con

You clearly lack the basic understanding of this debate, it whole point was so that YOU, could bring evidence and see how it matched up against other peoples' preferred ideas or theories, hence the name of the debate, "evidence for creation". You have yet to present anything other than I believe and that's evidence enough, so hopefully for the last time, please give a link to articles which back up your point or something cause I'm getting tired of your inability to comply to a simple rule that most debates require, maybe that's why your win ratio is so low? So please give me tangible evidence, or I'll just keep doing what I've been doing and tear apart your "theory" .
FollowerofChrist1955

Pro

That you do not possess the ability to understand the evidence is your problem. That you presume that debates you initiate requires the accepted to hand carry obvious evidence that exist in the public domain TO YOU is your 2nd error. The rule doesn"t include me being your butler cause your lazy.

I informed you at the beginning that EVERY evolution experiment FAILED to produce life that"s evidentiary fact available In The science journals. If you think it"s my job to bring that proof to you cause your lazy, stop asking question you ain"t interested in looking for yourself. Stay stupid!

The Condition not the insult. Bet you want me to look up the definition for you too? Nope not interested!
Debate Round No. 4
darkwolf

Con

Ah well this is the end, Pro stated that I am at falt for the lack of evidence in pro's argument, how that works I don't know this debate drifted from its intended purpose due to pro failure to understand that in order for someone to understand evidence you must first provide evidence as the debate stated. Pro stated there is evidence but didn't present any and then proceeded to insult me for asking evidence. So in term pro is at the end of the life cycle of the generic garden variety creationist, when your life is at an end try your hardest to make an impact which he has failed to do, so he attempts to pass on the folk tale to the other younger people.

Here's some fact for the pro, studies have shown that more and more young people are leaving churches, we are the next generation, it is pointless to try and argue with us you'll be gone before us anyway, so go on and keep believing and I'll keep up my studies to get into college and maybe even close the gaps so important to the evolution deniers and if or when I do I'll think of you.

I won't be able to read your response until Monday so see you then.

Oh and pro your first flaw is thinking I'd do your job and try to convince myself of your weak argument this proves the lack of evidence if you couldn't even muster up 1 single real point to argue.
FollowerofChrist1955

Pro

people can read junior, they don't need to be narrated by one who CANNOT read.
Debate Round No. 5
33 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 21 through 30 records.
Posted by BackCommander 3 years ago
BackCommander
Pro, you were so completely and totally incorrect throughout this whole debate that I can't even bring myself to vote on this. After reading every round of this debate and seeing you brought nothing but blind assertions and undeserved cockiness, I am so biased against you I can't cast a vote for this.

You showed absolutely no references to any of your (incorrect) assertions. You were completely wrong in pretty much every claim you made, you simply lied the entire debate. You act as though Con lost because they didn't answer your every question, yet fail to realize that your babbling wasn't logical or correct enough to even warrant a reply.

As a side note here, FollowerofChrist1955, you've decided to ask darkwold if they've HEARD of hell, right? Following that with a blind assertion that it is real is idiotic, back up your words, or continue to go through life thinking you're intelligent when you fail at any level to show any signs of intellect, either way.

Have you heard of Hel? Have you heard of Hades? Have you heard of Kur? Have you heard of the Chinvat Bridge? These are all places like the Abrahamic Hell, should me simply bringing them up be enough for me to claim they exist? If so, how can you refuse to take the time to look to see if its true? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that simply looking at a single religion and believing in it is stupid. Not even YOU can defend that kind of stupidity, so save your breath. Idiot.
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 3 years ago
FollowerofChrist1955
darkwolf;
let me ask you?
You have HEARD of Hell right? You know it's a place of torment where people go who don't know God and don't have salvation?

Despite this personal knowledge - you not only REFUSE to take the time to Look to see if it's TRUE you have absolutely no concern of GOING THERE!

it doesn't take a Rocket Scientist to see that' just stupid. And despite your thinking, not even YOU can defend that kind of stupidity. So save your breath.
Posted by darkwolf 3 years ago
darkwolf
Wow you really like to use the word stupid don't you, does stating that it is a mental condition make you feel smart? I hope so you need it, since you clearly lack any other form of intelligence, but hey everyone has something that butters their biscuit mine is science and yours seems to be feeling superior through false lessons and vocabulary.
Posted by darkwolf 3 years ago
darkwolf
Hey welcome to the debate nice to have a sliver of sanity, so on average who do you think, is doing the best at the debate. ( in case you don't have the voting privileges)
Posted by Blargh01 3 years ago
Blargh01
...Source of these failed experiments of trying to create life? You're really not providing any more arguments other than that one you're giving.
Posted by darkwolf 3 years ago
darkwolf
I will now rephrase pro's former statement, so follower you got nothing? You just ramble on and dazzle us with magic, and your own opinions?
Posted by darkwolf 3 years ago
darkwolf
It seems at this point pro has reached the limits of his argument, so I'll just state for the record, pro seems overly defensive and lacks a dictionary to look up the definition of opinion, so I'll give an example
Opinion- " god is real because I say so, you just don't have evidence but I do!!"
Non Opinion- "please provide evidence"
You may have seen a lot of that in this debate.
But pro's own opinions aren't completely overlooked by him, here's a few
" Well, I HAVE shown you THE PROOF by scientific experimentation from Darwin to Dawkins ... that Animal Life cannot BE created by NATURAL MEANS. HENCE your and everyone else's inability to ANSWER the question!"
Pro claims to have evidence, but hasn't provided it, and instead of addressing the lack of fore mentioned he attempts to turn the debate on me because I've destroyed his limp and lame arguments,
Further more Pro claims that anything microscopic isn't true life but this isn't true due to the fact that bacteria meet all of the classifications of living animals, pro then states that I should know that, which clearly shows his lack of contact with the real world outside of magic and dusty books. Should pro start to provide real evidence I'll correct myself on this comment, but he has yet to do so. Can't wait until next round almost final arguments.
(Wow this debate is moving fast but I guess it should since pro doesn't have to spend time doing research before he rambles on about my opinions, and ignores the basic point behind the debate, in favor of dark ages styled religion, attempting to instill misinformation, and fear in people to force them to believe.
Posted by darkwolf 3 years ago
darkwolf
But what about the Scientologist creation story both your's and theirs' have the same amount of evidence.
Both came from books and science has disproved both :), maybe your churches should consider a merger because you both seem to have a lot in common.
Posted by FollowerofChrist1955 3 years ago
FollowerofChrist1955
sure, just admit your WRONG and Creation IS ALL there is as an option to explain our presence!
Posted by darkwolf 3 years ago
darkwolf
didn't mean to post that so many times, but can we hurry this along?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wizofoz 3 years ago
Wizofoz
darkwolfFollowerofChrist1955Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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: At no time did Pro present any evidence for their point of view. There entire argument consisted of presenting a challenge they claimed proved that life was created. It made several assertions- such that "science knows life should not exist" without si]sufficient explanation or citation This in itself would be a fallacy, but when Con pointed to bacteria as an example that met Pros challenge, Pro simply mover=d the criteria. Conduct point to Con as pros "only a smacked dog howls" remark was an unnecessary insult.

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