The Instigator
Purushadasa
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
platoandaristotle
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

There is No Evidence in Favor of evo THEORY

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 3 votes the winner is...
platoandaristotle
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/4/2017 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,563 times Debate No: 103410
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (32)
Votes (3)

 

Purushadasa

Pro

evo THEORY is nothing but a biologically impossible myth
that has never happened, is not happening now,
and shall never happen in the future.
Prove me wrong and win $5,000.00 by watching this short video:
platoandaristotle

Con

I don't plan to watch that video, becuase it is age-restricted by YouTube.
Could you perhaps summarise yout point?
Even creationists agree that there is evidence for evolution (and yes, it's a theory, meaning that it's not a hypothesis and is supported by some evidence). Let's go over some of it.
1. Fossils
There is a clear and documented progression of fossils throughout the fossil record, including hundreds of fossils of transitional species like Ambulocetus natans(pakicetid to whale) and Homo habilis(Gorilla-like ape to human).
2. Microevolutionary experiments
There have been experiments in which new species are created in a lab - in fact, several have been done with flies. New species can develop in small, isolated populations of flies after several years.
Ever wonder why you have to get new flu shots every year? It's because the flu virus is evolving to evade detection by your immune system, and flu shots boost the ability of said system to detect the new virus.
Also, if you watch news regularly, you've heard of a strand of bacteria that cannot be killed by any known antibiotic.
If (as is very likely) life on earth has been aroud for billions of years, it is probable that evolution happened on a larger scale.
3. Imperfection
The human body has several "vestigial" organs - organs with no clear purpose. The wisdom teeth, tailbone, and some ligaments are examples.
Also, there are several examples of "bad design" such as the fact that images are reflected on the retina upside-down and that the brain is more emotion-driven than reason-driven.
Debate Round No. 1
Purushadasa

Pro

Because you're underage, here's the rated "G" version:
platoandaristotle

Con

Alright, so you want me to refute that video! Fine.
First, read my previous statement in full for evidence of evolution.
Inter-species propogation is not required for evolution unless you don't understand it. Evolution is about the development of new species through a series of beneficial mutations leading to genetic isolation.
As for two species which have successfully propogated - it depends on what you mean by successful.
Housecats and wildcats (different species) have been bred to create fertile children, though with varying degrees of success - Savannah cats are an example.
Lions and tigers have bred to create infertile "tigons" in captivity.
But let me remind you - those have little to do with evolution.
The link that Ockham gave you is a list of Wikipedia articles detailing these hybrids - take a look at those.
Debate Round No. 2
Purushadasa

Pro

Inter-species propogation is required for evo THEORY to be true unless you don't understand it.

"Savannah cats are an example."

You mentioned housecoats and Savannah cats.

Are you alleging that housecoats and Savannah cats have ever produced genetically viable offspring? If so, then please provide evidence for that claim.

Lions and tigers have bred to create infertile "tigons" in captivity.

Yes, and infertile tigons are not a genetically viable species.

You lost the debate.
platoandaristotle

Con

https://en.wikipedia.org... - Savannahs are bred between servals and domestic cats. They can then breed with other domestic cats to produce less wild Savannahs.
Looks like you still have failed to refute my opening. Fossilization works when empty areas in an organism are filled with minerals. That is not exactly complex.
Speciation happened in a lab - did God intervene? I don't see the need for a God in order for random mutations to genetically isolate a species. http://darwinwasright.org...
"You lost the debate"
I'll let the judges decide that. I ask them to look at the comments as well.
Now that I have shown you the Savannah cat, where's my 2 bitcoins($5000)?
Debate Round No. 3
32 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 11 through 20 records.
Posted by Purushadasa 3 years ago
Purushadasa
The voting system cannot and does not ensure that voters are rational. In fact, the voters on this site are not rational, and they are utterly unqualified to make rational votes.

I won all of the debates in which I have participated on this site, except one (which I deliberately forfeited), no matter how anyone votes because the voters are hopelessly biased and intellectually dishonest.
Posted by platoandaristotle 3 years ago
platoandaristotle
The voting system is meant to ensure that voters are rational, taking into account conduct etc. as well as arguments. Conservative PC police think that things have a liberal bias every time they don't have a conservative bias.
You only won 3 debates, and that is because your conduct is so poor, it takes a very high level of bad grammar, bad conduct, and bad arguments to win a debate.
Posted by Purushadasa 3 years ago
Purushadasa
The so-called "voting" system join this site is 100% biased, and it is nothing but a big joke.

I clearly won this debate, no matter how anyone votes.
Posted by Masterful 3 years ago
Masterful
Yet again the voters are calling his BS!
Posted by Purushadasa 3 years ago
Purushadasa
Also, Ocky, you provided exactly ZERO evidence in favor of evo THEORY, so yes, it is just your opinion. It is also your faith-based religion, and is not observable science. I win and you lose.
Posted by Purushadasa 3 years ago
Purushadasa
I am not a Creationist, and my posts here have nothing to do with Creationism. You obviously have trouble reading -- maybe your mommy can help you to understand my actual position. Please ask her for help when she comes back from the welfare office.
Posted by Ockham 3 years ago
Ockham
It's not just my opinion. The scientific community is basically united in favor of the theory of evolution, with the exception of a handful of crackpots.

I don't argue with creationists. My view is that if you are a creationist then you can just go spend some time in the library and then you won't be a creationist any more.
Posted by platoandaristotle 3 years ago
platoandaristotle
Ockham - Thanks for feedback!
Posted by Purushadasa 3 years ago
Purushadasa
Ockham -- my side was not for Creationism, which shows that you probably have trouble reading: You need to re-read my actual argument, and try again. Maybe your parents can help you to comprehend the meanings of my actual statements.

Thank you for your opinion on evo THEORY, and thank you for providing no evidence for it, only your opinion, and also thank you for admitting the fact that all you have is opinion and no evidence.
Posted by Purushadasa 3 years ago
Purushadasa
Also, hybridization means the mating of two "breeds," not two species, so you lost quadruply.

Again, thanks for your time!
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Phenenas 3 years ago
Phenenas
PurushadasaplatoandaristotleTied
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: Anyone who isn't Purushadasa deserves to win.
Vote Placed by QueenDaisy 3 years ago
QueenDaisy
PurushadasaplatoandaristotleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not provide any actual arguments, as external links may only be used as sources, not arguments. Pro provided evidence for evolution, and hence wins arguments. Neither side had any conduct or SP&G issues. Both sides provided sources, but neither stood out as more reliable than the other.
Vote Placed by philochristos 3 years ago
philochristos
PurushadasaplatoandaristotleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: pro placed the burden of proof on Con in the first round by saying, 'prove me wrong.' Con gave three lines of evidence in his opening to show that there is evidence for evolutionary theory. pro never offered a rebuttal to those lines of evidence, so Con wins the debate. links do not count as arguments. Con had no obligation to respond to the video.

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