Instigator / Pro
0
1491
rating
10
debates
45.0%
won
Topic
#1052
Evolution vs god
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Winner
0
1
After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...
crossed
Tags
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 20,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
1
1377
rating
62
debates
25.81%
won
Description
Rules:
1.) Pay attention to grammar and spelling
2.) Use quote bricks mechanic for quotes
3.) The burden of proof relies on both contenders equally. I have to prove evolution exists, and crossed has to prove that god created modern species intentionally and directly.
4.) Rebuttals will take place like this:
Quote block
Rebuttal
Round 1
Pro
#1
To begin, I should explain how evolution is theorized to work, as well as state that during this debate we will both have to provide convincing evidence as to why our argument is factually correct.
The theory of evolution goes a little like this:
In a setting of competition amongst species, only the best can survive. This is not determined by some outer force, as these things go hand in hand. If you are the most fit, (Intelligent, fast, creative, strong, etc.) you will be able to find more food and mates than a similar animal that is less fit or a specimen of the same species that is less fit. This is survival of the fittest.
If members of a species are isolated from the main body of the species, two things will happen: One, they will be inbreeding at a certain point, and inbreeding speeds up mutations. Two, though mutations are random, there are Beneficial, Neutral, and harmful mutations. Harmful will hurt the animal and give it a handicap, which is why very few harmful mutations survive long enough to reproduce. Neutral mutations that have no effect on the animal will stay in the animal and be passed on if the animal manages to reproduce, but will not help the animal reproduce in the first place. Lastly, beneficial mutations like more color rods in the eyes or white fur in the arctic, though random, will help the animal in question survive or reproduce better.
That out of the way, I present to my opponent a key piece of evidence that evolution exists.
Homologous structures.
As shown in this picture:
Humans have humerus (Tan), a radius and ulna (White and red), as well as carpals yellow, metacarpals, and phalanges (both brown).
Other animals also have very similar structures, as they have for millions of years.
So what does this mean?
It means that way, way back in time, humans split off from dogs, birds, and whales at separate times during evolution. They had a common ancestor that was the early step in our evolution back then.
This common ancestor did not look like a human, though. In fact, it looked like a small rat. On the human side, the rat turned into a monkey, which turned into an ape, which turned into a human after millions of generations of competition and natural selection. On the whale side, that rat turned into a bigger mammal, which became a swimming animal, and after millions of generations, it's legs retracted back into it's hindquarters, and the species became whales.
This is why whales still have the remnants of legs in their skeletons. The legs do not benefit them, but they also do not harm them yet, so the legs are unlikely to evolve out.
In my opponents past arguments on a similar debate, they talked about the colorations of plants, and how, if life was created intelligently, the creator decided to color plants that way to decorate their world. The way it was compared, my opponent made it seem like an intelligent choice similar to how he would choose a red hat to go with a red shirt.
Plants, frankly, aren't like this at all. There is a certain chemical called Chlorophyll that assists chloroplasts in photosynthesis. If life was created intelligently, then plants wouldn't die if only given filtered green light.
The bible is famous for contradicting science. It said the earth is flat. It said that god created all life on earth, as is, at the same time as the universe (same week, roughly). Technically, it is science that contradicts the bible. After all, the world was discovered to be spherical as late as 1492, if not earlier. Darwin didn't preform his experiments in the Galapagos until 1835.
Not to be hypocritical, but this very recent evidence (Including space travel and DNA mapping) seems like better evidence of evolution existing than the "trustworthy" word of a book over 2000 years old.
What is more logical to believe, I ask you all. If you have a connect the dots book with almost all the dots connected and clear paths between unconnected dots, you will have reason to trust it more than a book with the promise that the dots were connected 2000 years ago by a VERY NICE MAN, but haven't been able to truly connect any dots yourself in your life.
I am very prepared to spend the entire next argument refuting and shooting down the religious ideas of my opponent.
Con
#2
if life was created by god we would see evidence of god using thinking intelligence and knowledge in his creations. we would see this because only an intelligent being can possess these quality.
A flood or tornado or nothing can not posses intelligence knowledge and or thinking.
some animals show this but i want to focus upon medical plants. because medical plants show all three.
for example tumeric can heal a damaged brain via 270 individual pathways through the brain.
tumeric shows the creator intelligence knowledge and thinking
. turmeric roots heal a damaged brain via 270 individual pathways in the brain. to create such plant would require
intelligence knowledge and thinking. the creator of the turmeric roots would need to have intelligence of at least 1000 neurosurgeons to create the medical properties inside the roots that heal the brain like that.
The creator of turmeric roots would also need great knowledge of the inner workings of the brain in order to heal it. He would also have to have knowledge on how to travel 270 pathways through the brain in order to heal a damaged brain. He would have knowledge on how to heal a brain.
The creator would have to be thinking about people with broken brains when creating tumeric. we know this because he put medical properties in a plant that heal broken brains via 270 known pathways.
the founder of green med info claims there has been a couple of thousand study's done on tumeric that confirm this. the founder of green med info wrote this blog.
I find this important because there are scientist doing study's on the health effect on plants. Then there are the scientist who study evolution.
evolution for example believe that a fern is just a tiny tree. and that over millions of years the fern grew mutations that made it grow 30 feet in size. What evolution scientist have not taken into account the health benefits in plants.
which could have only been done by god. the fern for example has health benefits for almost every organ. but it specifically helps out human females with there female issues. The fern helps with period problems breast problems etc.
the problem is that the fern can not have health benefits that help humans. If scientist timeline is correct. scientist say the fern came about 360 million years ago. but humans came about 200 thousand years ago.
so your saying that the fern has health benefits that help humans when humans did not appear for another 360 million years. this screws up almost there entire timeline for plants because i can not think of one plant that came into existence in the last 200 thousand years according to science.
more than half of plants have medical properties specifically to help humans. and because plant help out humans it means god was thinking about humans when creating these plants. for example sweet flag roots have been known to cure people of stuttering it goes inside the brain and fixes stuff.
Only humans can have stuttering problems because only humans have the ability to talk. so the only possible way sweet flag came into existence is god. because god specifically created it to help stuttering. so god was thinking about humans when he was creating this plant.
almost all animals have the same organs. an immune system a brain a liver 2 kidneys etc. just like that humerus you were talking about in your last post. almost all animals have 2 eyes 2 ears 1 nose 1 mouth. Almost all animals have either 2 arms 2 legs or just 4 legs. this is not because all life came from the same source. but because all life came from the same creator.
some things like organs could only come from god and not a bunch of nothing. Because there is a forth thing only an intelligent being can do that goes with intelligence knowledge and thinking. and this fourth thing is differentiating .
can a bunch of nothing differentiate between two things like humans and god can. god can differentiate between good people and bad people and sends them to either hell or heaven.
humans can tell the difference between a bad person and a good person and we throw bad people in jail. only an intelligent being can differentiate between stuff. just like how only an intelligent being can have knowledge intelligence or thinking. a bunch of nothing can not think have intelligence and have knowledge. to be able to differentiate you have to use one or all of either intelligence knowledge and or thinking. lets say you are looking for an banana tree you are told to look for the fruit that is tall and skinny and is bunched together
you see a coconut tree you think it is a banana but you were able to differentiate the two because you had knowledge that the banana is skinny unlike the round coconut. how did a bunch of nothing create the apple since it needs to differentiate. the apple can differentiate between good germs and bad germs and only feed the good germs. it can do this because god is intelligent and can differentiate. a bunch of nothing can not do this because it lacks intelligence and can not differentiate the two.
a bunch of nothing would create an apple were it would end up feeding both good and bad germs.
and why would the animal change so drastically an alligator to a bird but these things stay the same. like how many number of body parts and organs.
organs using differentiating
the appendix can differentiate between good germs and bad germs because of god. god created the appendix to be a safe house for good germs. god could tell the difference between good and bad germs. if life was created by a bunch of nothing it would need to tell the difference between good and bad germs. it can not do this because it is not intelligent.
it would probably work like other inanimate objects like tornado and floods and effect both the good and bad germs. in the case of the appendix it would probably be a safe house for both good and bad germs because nothing can not tell the difference between the two.
our digestive system differentiates between good nutrients and toxins and other chemicals. the digestive system uses the good nutrients but throws the bad stuff life toxins and other chemicals to the kidneys or our waste system like peeing.
the digestive system can tell the difference between good nutrients and toxins. if life was created by nothing it would probably dump both good nutrients and toxins down the hole. because it can not tell the difference between good nutrients and toxins.
because a bunch of nothing can not differentiate the two. To differentiate you have to be able to think. and the thoughts of that thinking would be these good germs help me i better spare them. but these bad germs are bad i better kill them.
colors
evolution says that arctic animals turned white because they adapted in the snow
evolution says that desert animals turned yellow because they adapted in the yellow desert
evolution says swamp creature turned green because they adapted in the green environment.
what this fails to take into account is that grass is green to go with the green trees. blue grass would not go well with green trees now does it.
evolution needs to prove that it took millions of years for an arctic animal to turn white to go with the white snow. because if it is just white to go with the white snow and it did not adapt over millions of years it is evidence for god using intelligence
god created the swampy forest creatures green to go with the swampy green
god created Alaskan creatures white to go with the white snow
god created desert animals yellow to go with the yellow desert
god created the trees green to go with the green grass
god was intelligent enough to know that a forest green creature would not go well with an Alaskan areas.
i will explain this better through the seasonal weasel
coloring weasels
Weasels are grey and or brown during the summer time but are white during the winter time
what this is like
God created the weasel to turn white so that it can go with the white winter.
a race car driver drives a green car so he decides to were green cloths so it goes with the green car.
I paint my house blue but i decide to also paint my mailbox blue to go with the blue house
God created the rabbits white during the winter so that it can go with the white snow
Or i have a white house so i color the fence around it white to go with the white fence
or me wearing a red shirt so i decide to wear red pants to go with it.
or if Santa clause wears red. so he paints his sleigh red to go with it
or if i have a brick house so i build a brick mailbox to go with the brick mailbox
This is why whales still have the remnants of legs in their skeletons. The legs do not benefit them, but they also do not harm them yet, so the legs are unlikely to evolve out.
they also forged some whale fossils. so what are the chances your bones are real
it says
Dr. Werner documented that blowholes were added to skeletal models of the walking whales Pakicetus and Ambulocetus even though fossil evidence of the blowhole region had not been found; a whale’s tail (fluke) was added to the walking whale Rodhocetus except no tail fossils had been found; and front fins were added to the walking whales Rodhocetus and Pakicetus when fossils of fins did not exist. According to Dr. Werner
and this guy has quiet the list against evolution
In my opponents past arguments on a similar debate, they talked about the colorations of plants, and how, if life was created intelligently, the creator decided to color plants that way to decorate their world. The way it was compared, my opponent made it seem like an intelligent choice similar to how he would choose a red hat to go with a red shirt.Plants, frankly, aren't like this at all. There is a certain chemical called Chlorophyll that assists chloroplasts in photosynthesis. If life was created intelligently, then plants wouldn't die if only given filtered green light.
i was aware of this i am saying god created most plants green so the plants go together. He used chlorophyll as his dye. flowers that are blue and yellow and other pretty colors is god decorating
the name chlorophyll makes what i say sound crazy because it is a big word. but i is no different if i use food coloring in food to make pretty bread. yellow bread pink bread green bread blue bread. i like bread
The bible is famous for contradicting science. It said the earth is flat. It said that god created all life on earth, as is, at the same time as the universe (same week, roughly). Technically, it is science that contradicts the bible. After all, the world was discovered to be spherical as late as 1492, if not earlier. Darwin didn't preform his experiments in the Galapagos until 1835.Not to be hypocritical, but this very recent evidence (Including space travel and DNA mapping) seems like better evidence of evolution existing than the "trustworthy" word of a book over 2000 years old.What is more logical to believe, I ask you all. If you have a connect the dots book with almost all the dots connected and clear paths between unconnected dots, you will have reason to trust it more than a book with the promise that the dots were connected 2000 years ago by a VERY NICE MAN, but haven't been able to truly connect any dots yourself in your life.
given how many prophesy for the future that 200 year old book has given how many are wrong
the solar system is perfectly balanced if one thing gets off balanced the entire universe would science to exist. the sun for example is perfect coordinated with our planet if it was any closer we would burn to death if it was any firth we would freeze to death. if life happened by chance what are the chances that the sun would perfectly align in the right spot in order to create life. along with all the stars and other planets doing the same. the moon and sun must be perfectly synced with each other. now the chances of that happening by chance is like if you or me were thinking the same thing at the same time. if there was no moon there would be floods
the bible does not say the earth is flat.
i do not know what they are feeding you with those evolution book but is seems pretty wrong
whats this evidence with dna mapping and space travel. because we can trace are ancestry to a single female. and all humans can trace there ancestry to her
The theory of evolution goes a little like this:
In a setting of competition amongst species, only the best can survive. This is not determined by some outer force, as these things go hand in hand. If you are the most fit, (Intelligent, fast, creative, strong, etc.) you will be able to find more food and mates than a similar animal that is less fit or a specimen of the same species that is less fit. This is survival of the fittes
i sure a bigger bear would kill a little bear. because it is bigger. and there are seasonal creatures. and i believe god created animals with functions that help him live in its environment. i mean why would god not give the green lizard that lives in the desert the ability to change its color. its stands out like a sore thumb. what i do not believe is this took millions of years. i believe god created the polar bear white to live in the white snow. i do not believe that the polor bear was a black bear and over millions of years it turned white. i believe animals a have parts that help them with there environment, what i think is wrong is the process evolution.
If members of a species are isolated from the main body of the species, two things will happen: One, they will be inbreeding at a certain point, and inbreeding speeds up mutations. Two, though mutations are random, there are Beneficial, Neutral, and harmful mutations. Harmful will hurt the animal and give it a handicap, which is why very few harmful mutations survive long enough to reproduce. Neutral mutations that have no effect on the animal will stay in the animal and be passed on if the animal manages to reproduce, but will not help the animal reproduce in the first place. Lastly, beneficial mutations like more color rods in the eyes or white fur in the arctic, though random, will help the animal in question survive or reproduce better.
yes but what caused he mutation that started to turn the fish fins into legs.
Round 2
Con
#4
Debaticus said in comments
I want to apologize for missing the last argument. I was offline for more than 4 days and didn't have time to see your argument. Let's please attempt to continue this debate as if I didn't do something stupid. Forfeit the next round and I will refute your round 1 argument.
OK.I won't make any new arguments. I just want to explain my differentiating here real quick so it is easier to understand.
the apple feeds good germs but not bad germs.
The creator must have had knowledge that good germs help us and that bad germs hurt us. So he used this knowledge when creating the apple. he designed the apple to only feed the good germs because he had knowledge that if it fed the bad germs that it would spell trouble.
the creator of the apple has to be god because he had to have knowledge that bad bacteria is bad and good bacteria is good. A bunch of nothing can not have knowledge. If a bunch of nothing created life the apple would feed both good and bad bacteria because a bunch of nothing does not have knowledge that bad bacteria is bad and it would be bad if the apple fed the bad bacteria But he also had knowledge that it would be good to feed good bacteria. Then he act upon it in the creation of the apple
Round 3
Con
#6
intelligent choice
An intelligent choice is a choice that you make through thinking and knowledge. Only a being that can have intelligence knowledge and or thinking can make intelligent choices.
So if life was created by nothing how can it make intelligent choices.
Examples of an intelligent choice
I have two books in front of me. One has a barbie doll on the cover. The other one has a cool dragon on the cover. I have knowledge that dragons are cool and barbie are stupid. So i make an intelligent choice
to read the dragon book.
I am at the animal shelter i have the choice to pick between 2 cats one is grey one is orange. i already have an orange cat so i make the intelligent choice to pick the grey one.
Many of god creations show that he made an intelligent choice. plants and organs show him making intelligent choices.
an apple feed the good germs but not the bad. god knew that if the apple fed the bad germs it would be trouble. So god made the intelligent choice and designed the apple to feed the good germs and not the bad germs. god chose between good and bad germs.
If nothing created life the apple would feed both good and bad germs because it can not make an intelligent choice
Olive oil attacks cancer cells but not good cells. God knew that if the olive destroyed good cells it would be bad. but he also knew that if it killed bad cancer cells that it would benefit humans.
so god made the intelligent choice. He create olive oil to attack the cancer cells but not the normal cells. a treatment called chemotherapy is were the doctor poison a patient in the hopes to kill cancer cells.
but the poison can not make the intelligent choice. the poison destroys both good an bad cells because it is not intelligent. if life was created by nothing this is what we would see olive oil do this.
The appendix has been discovered to be a safe house for good germs. The appendix does not help bad germs. god knew that if the appendix helped the bad germs that it would be bad.
So he made the intelligent choice and design the appendix to be a safe house for good germs but not a safe house for bad germs. Gods intelligent choice is he chose good germs over bad
organs and many plants make intelligent choices all the time.
simplify
Me choosing to read a dragon book over a barbie book is an intelligent choice
God choosing to create the apple to feed good germs and not bad germs is an intelligent choice
God creating olive oil to kill cancer cells and not normal cells is an intelligent choice.
me choosing the grey cat over the orange because i own an orange cat is an intelligent choice.
god creating the appendix as a safe house for good germs but not for bad is god making an intelligent choice. he is choosing between good and bad germs
perfectly synced space
A book i was reading at 11 last night. The book of nature said something that spawn my theory on the space and how it was sync. the book of nature is a book that was written in the 18 century by a fellow named John Mason.
the book is in the public domain because it is so old. but it says this on page 50
part of page 50
which enter into them exhibiting proportions equally definite and invariable; thus affording another proof of close connection between the phenomena of natureand the occasional developments of revelation ; the philosopher beholding now,as the prophet beheld formerly,that the almighty architect has literallyadjusted everything by weight and measured the waters meted out the heavens accurately comprehended the dust of the earth, "weighed he mountains in scales and the hills in a balance
it is basically saying that god took into account stuff like the weight on the leaf and he weight it just enough so it can float around.
It seems he does not claim this anymore because he says "beheld formerly". but this is exactly what god did with the solar system. he literally adjusted it and measured it till everything was in the perfect spot with no flaws. when i say everything i mean everything the sun the moon etc
in the article
The perfect balance of the solar system
it talks about how perfectly aligned the solar system is
the sun and moon are perfectly synced. the sun is not to hot or to cold. god measured it till the sun and moon were in the perfect spots. everything is perfectly synced. the article talks about how even the planets could not have formed over a long time but had to be created rapidly
planets created rapidly
But even if our neighboring planets somehow formed quickly from accumulating space dust, recently discovered exoplanets (extrasolar planets) have changed secular solar system formation theory.
there scratching there heads at what could have done this. i will let you in on a secret it was god
There are many factors that would make a star system too hostile for life to even get started, let alone survive for any period long enough to evolve. So what sort of star provides the perfect conditions for a habitable planet elsewhere in the universe?
it talks about how perfectly synced the sun and moon are along with the stars. the chances of the solar system coming from nothing is if i won the lottery one trillion zillion times. so those odds are impossible thus it mus the god.god would have fined tuned everything in nature. a bunch of nothing would not have.
Theistic evolution, anyone?
The little indented, shaded lines used for quoting a website or your opponent.
I cant show them in the comments section, i dont think, because i dont see the option
Stupid question-- but what are "quote bricks"?
I want to apologize for missing the last argument. I was offline for more than 4 days and didn't have time to see your argument. Let's please attempt to continue this debate as if I didn't do something stupid. Forfeit the next round and I will refute your round 1 argument.
Sorry, didn't register your username.
Also, I love the flak in response to a legitimate point in any comment section and logging in today to see two new comments from the people I tagged made me happy.
I can’t prove the existence of a deity. If I did, I wouldn’t be an atheist.
God gave us the ability
then how come humans can intentionally and directly influence it?
Also, how can you prove the existence of a diety behind the opaqueness of a self-sufficient process?
Yes. Evolution can be compatible with the idea of an intelligent creator.
I dont like the title. Evolution IS God's process
Quote bricks are good for lengthy quotes, but most of the time I suggest formatting which does not add so much space above and below.
tiny.cc/DebateArt