The Instigator
Purushadasa
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
CRAZYMAN890
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Mankind Is Devolving, Not Evolving

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...
CRAZYMAN890
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/6/2017 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,289 times Debate No: 103423
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (1)

 

Purushadasa

Pro

Mankind's lifespan is constantly decreasing with time, along with bodily strength and intelligence -- not increasing (as the evo THEORY camp would have you believe):

According to linguistic scholars, all modern languages devolved from more complex ancient languages. When God first revealed language, it was much, much more complex than any language in common modern use, because ancient mankind was much more intelligent than modern mankind is: Language was originally designed with intelligence by God, and it was given to mankind as a gift. The original language of mankind is called Sanskrit, and all of the other extant languages on the planet are derived from Sanskrit, either directly or indirectly.

The Sanskrit language was mankind's original language, and it takes a total of 12 years to learn and speak fluently: It is presently known as a "dead language" because although it was once spoken all over the earth, by all human beings, it is currently spoken fluently by fewer than 100 people on the planet. This is because it is far too complex for the less intelligent modern mind to understand fully and speak fluently.

Sanskrit is the most striking linguistic example of modern man's intelligence having devolved to lesser than that of ancient man. Other linguistic evidences include the other "dead languages," such as Latin and Hebrew, which are, to a lesser degree than Sanskrit, also very complex languages that are very difficult for modern man to understand fully and speak fluently.

All of this linguistic evidence means that language has become less and less complex, over time, as mankind's intelligence level has decreased over time. This trend of diminishing intelligence, as evidenced by mankind's irrefutably diminishing linguistic aptitude, continues to this very day, with language skills gradually getting lesser and lesser with each new generation of humans. Not only that, but ancient societies with superior intelligence also produced superior technology to that of modern man. For example, modern man is unable to build structures such as giant stone pyramids, for lack of technological knowledge, but everyone knows that ancient cultures did indeed have that superior technological knowledge.

Therefore the strange claims of Darwin were clearly false: Mankind is demonstrably getting less intelligent as time passes, and modern man clearly has less knowledge, less intelligence, and inferior language skills as well as inferior technology compared to those of ancient mankind.
CRAZYMAN890

Con

Language is not proof that humans are becoming dumber. THE evidence e you presented about us having lost our intellect of building great stuff like the pyramids,Ever heard of the Twin towers, Eiffel tower, and the empire state building well suppressing the ancient pyramids . I dont fully understand what you were trying to say since we dont speak a ancient language anymore we are devolving and becoming dumber, but mankind are making robots, hover boards and soon we are going to mars but still somehow this is devolving.
Debate Round No. 1
Purushadasa

Pro

Someone wrote:

"Language is not proof that humans are becoming dumber."

I never made that claim, so that is a straw man logical fallacy on your part.

"THE evidence e you presented about us having lost our intellect of building great stuff like the pyramids"

I never made that statement either, so that is another straw man logical fallacy on your part.

You lost the debate: Thanks for your time! =)
CRAZYMAN890

Con

What are you talking about the only thing you said in your post was that we lost complex language and how to build great stuff like pyramids , and you saying you didn't all all here from you is this now
Debate Round No. 2
Purushadasa

Pro

Someone wrote:

"What are you talking about "

I'm talking about mankind's proven devolution. What are you talking about?

"the only thing you said in your post was that we lost complex language"

That is not something that I said, actually, so that is a straw man logical fallacy on your part.

" and how to build great stuff like pyramids"

I didn't say that either, so that is another straw man logical fallacy on your part.

" , and you saying you didn't all all here from you is this now"

What???

You lost the debate: Thanks for your time! =)
CRAZYMAN890

Con

Are you serious stop using stupid phrases like straw man fallacy you weak will fool you cant defend your ideas so all you weak will fools use are straw man illogical stuff you should be bowing down to me and say sorry
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 11 through 13 records.
Posted by kjw47 3 years ago
kjw47
Yes we are at the farthest point away from what perfection was-Adam and Eve--until they rebelled. But Gods promise is that it will be like that again,( perfection) but permanent--Gods kingdom rule will never end-Daniel 2:4)---Gods kingdom is a cure all.
Posted by Purushadasa 3 years ago
Purushadasa
I made no claims of any "genetic factor," so your comment in that regard is a non-sequitur.
Posted by platoandaristotle 3 years ago
platoandaristotle
You failed to demonstrate any genetic factor at play. So this does not refute evolution FACT lol
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Phenenas 3 years ago
Phenenas
PurushadasaCRAZYMAN890Tied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: "You lost the debate: Thanks for your time! =)" No he didn't.

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