The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

is evolution real?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Anonymous has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/31/2018 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 981 times Debate No: 114760
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)



Hello, I saw you debating someone on this topic and thought I might challenge you to a debate about it. I am a Christian and I do not believe in evolution. You may start the opening argument for this debate.


If Humans and other species of primate came from a common ansester, we should find evidence of this in our DNA, first lets take a step back and considor evolution from the prespective of Darwin, he proposed a metaphorical tree of life whose branches were defined by the Linnaean taxonomic classification scheme, that is the familial relationships between life forms were organized around their morphologys, Darwin published origins of species almost a century before the discovery of DNA which was later used as one of the primary basis for classifying organisims and whats now known as phylogenetics. If evolutionary theory is correct, if we compare Linnaean hierarchy of genetic ones we should expect a significant overlap, and this is exactly what we find, DNA cross confirms Linnaean taxonomy more then 80% of the time, in other words DNA tells the same story as Darwins tree of life, DNA is also incredibly useful for determining various aspects of populations, for example the hardy-weinberg equation which serves as the basis for paternity tests, can be used along with with distint gene markers to calculate when life forms diverged from a common ansestor, we can use the mathamatical models brought to us by differential equations and apply them to DNA to determine that Europeans broke off from Africans 50,000 years ago, that the Homo-genus broke off from other primates around 6,000,000 years ago and so on. Next considor the chronological order of organisms in the fossil record, if evolutionary theroy is correct, then we should find that their placement in history corresponds to the mathematical extrapolations involving DNA, and that both of these chronological hierarchies should correspond to the aforementioned morphological and genetic family trees, and guess what, thats exactly what we find. Why is it that every avenue of biological categorization consistently points to evolution from a common ancestor, the only mathamatical models that are able to account for the overlap of diffrent taxonomic trees are evolutionary algorithms, evolutionary theory not only is sublime in that it accurately tells us what we should expect to find but also in that it tells us what we shouldent expect to find, it is also useful to define the term "vestigial structure" a vestige is a structure whose function has changed, but it doesnt necessarily have to be useless, its also useful to define the related term "atavism" which refers to the reappearance of a characteristic unique to an organisms ancestor. The relevance of atavisms and vestiges to evolutionary theory is that if we all came from a common ansestor, our DNA should have metaphorical extra baggage from our ancestors, and that should be expressed both molecularly and morphologically, moreover the extra baggage can belong only to the lineage of the organism in question. We expect to occasionally find semi-functional tails in humans, remnants of teeth in birds and hind fins on dolphins as extra baggage from their ancestors, but we also never expect to find bones or their remnants in invertebrates, celluose in animal cells, or memories on amphibians because these features are not found in any organisms in these examples respective ancestries, the fact that atavisms and vestiges fulfilled this prediction with zero condradictions with any of the hierarchies that ive already mentioned serves as extreamely powerful evidence that all organisms descended from a common ancestor. In fact, evolution is the only theory capable of explaing psychological atavisms and vestiges, one example of such is of human infants instinctively knowing how to float when placed in water, before loosing this abillity after a few weeks, and another is of the abillity of over a third of all infants to use the palmar grasp reflex to support their own body weights with their hands and feet, which is a feature prevalent in juvenile members of other species of primates that is used to keep the baby latched on to the mother, because there are no grip points on a human female for her baby, this reflex is vestigial and like the aforementioed flotation reflex, it generally disapears in a matter of weeks. Again, only evolutionary theory is caplable of explaing the existence of this extra baggage, yet another prediction that evolutionary theory has accuratley made concerns endogenous retroviruses, which can be regarded as vestiges at the molecular level, when a retrovirus enters a germ cell belonging to the host, its genetic material becomes permanently integrated with its hosts DNA, and since DNA is passed on to the next generation of organisms the ERV also gets passed on, if all organisms came from a common ancestor, then the distribution of ERV's in the genomes should reflect that, in other words, a typically 500 basepair long ERV withen the three billion basepair long human genome must be identical both in sequence and location to an ERV found in other species of primates, evolution is the only probable candidate for the exitence of shared ERV's because the odds that a single ERV intergrated itself into an identical location in two diffrent organisims is approximately one in three billion. If evolutionary theory is correct then we should expect to find at least one common ERV between humans and chimps, as it happens we share around two hundred thousond identicly placed and identically sequenced ERV's with chimps, in addition to this, studies of ERV's and other genomes have yielded statistical distributions of ERV parallels that allow us to catergorize organisms by maximizing the number of shared ERV's and minimizing the number of differing ones, the end result is a phylogeny that is based exclusively on ERV's, and it also cross confirms the aforementioned chronological and structural hierarchies, finally we get to one of the most famous pieces of genetic evidence for common ancestry between humans and other great apes, all of the great apes that are not human posses 24 pairs of chromosomes, but humans only have 23 pairs. If evolutionary theroy is accurate then the common ancestor to all great apes had either 23 pairs of chromosomes or 24 pairs of chromosomes, if the former is correct, then the ansestors unique to the other great apes must have had one of their chromosome pairs divide into two independent pairs of chromosomes, and if the latter is correct, then the ansestors unique to modern humans must have had two pairs of their chromosomes fused into one larger paie, in either case, there would be signs that such an event had taken place, and if evolutionary theory is accurate, then we should expect to find those signs, as it happens, we did find it, the percise location of the fusion site on human chromosome#2 was located in mid-2006 successfully vindicating yet another prediction of evolutionary theory, this was an extreamly short list of obserable and testable evidence for evolution that comes only from genetics, other evidence strictly from the feild of genetics and biochemistry would include
*non-ERV molecular vestiges
*molecular convergence
*Roles of gene duplication
*addition of new nucleotide combinations to DNA
this is without going into the mountains of other evidence that includes thousands of discovered transisitonal forms, dozens of witnessed speciation events, and the perfectly consistent geological record, this perfect geological record is filled with a large number of very simple predictions and il list just a few of them here.

If evolutionary theory is accurate, then the following predictions will hold.

*You will never find Aviance in sediment older then the Jurassic
*You will never find Amphibians in sediment older than the Devonian
*You will never find Primates in sediment older than the Cretaceous
*You will find only aquatic life in sediment older than the Silurian
*You will never find a fossilized Rabbit in the Precambrian


: Macro and micro evolution.
This is probaly one of the most pathetic consepts ive herd, the terms macro and micro evolution were derived from christian/creationists who obviously dont understand what they are talking about, they say that micro evolution is "adaptation" and theirby not really evolution, they often apply this pathetic construct to dogs and rabbits, however, what they have failed to understand is that in order for something like the change of skintone or a change in fur color to occur, this requires modification of the genetic code which can only happen through mutation for this to happen in the first place, it also requires natural selection and selective pressures in order for these advantages to be carryed out through the majoirty of a species population, and probaly the biggest failure of all, is that macro evolution and micro evolution are the EXACT same thing, the only diffrence is time, they fail to realize how these slight changes in short periods of time end up adding up to bigger changes over long periods of time.

*Christian/creation micro evolution logical failure*
-A Chihuahua along with all other species of dogs including the ones that cant interbreed with each other decending from an ancient population of wolf is perfectly reasonable and possible.

-A Human along with all other species of great apes including the ones that cant interbreed with each other decending from an ancient population of great ape's, is completely unreasonable and impossible.
*Christian/creation micro evolution logical failure*
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by asta 3 years ago

Next time, if you break out your arguments into sections easy to read, your opponent will be more likely to respond.
Posted by Mopssswop 3 years ago
Well dang Im_Intelligent
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

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