debate evolution

[chidoriroar]

debate evolution

i do not agree with evolution

my arguments:

1. evolution states that creatures developed over long periods of time if so then there would be billions of intermediate creatures but despite us having 80% of earths fossil record we find no such creatures.

2. if creatures evolved from simple to complex then howecome creatures like the trilobite and the shark are more complex than creatures after them?

3. Darwin states that if there was an intelligent design that couldnt develop over a long period of time his theory would be destroyed. Bacteria is an example because all the parts need to work together at the same time. for more information search about it on you tube

4. if the universe was created by random events there would be no patterns but the golden ratio is a pattern

5. how could the big bang happen if there was nothing in the first place?

6. simmilar design mean the same creator not evolution.

7. the theory that the world is still expanding proves that the universe had a beggining

8. its possible that the big bang happened because god could have made it happen.

9. how come we find fossils that are 300 milllion years old that are exactly the same?

10. how come in the 30,000 years weve been on this earth not a single cell has evolved?

[Rotate]

I thought this was going to say how debates have changed over the course of time.

1. We find a few intermediant creatures but most of the debree the creature leaves behind like bones, are destroyed. If you find a fossil it will only be in sedimentary rock. Though that 80% could just be an estimate.

2. Creatures evolve to help survive their surroudings. Sometimes the simplest creatures are the best survivors which is why they don't need to be complex.

3. Not sure about what you're asking but I'm too lazy to look it up on youtube

4. I don't know what the golden ratio is and again I'm too lazy to look it up right now.

5. There was a quick flare of heat that produced Hydrogen and Helium. Which in term produced galaxies which held clusters of stars. The heat cooled down too quickly for anything else to form. From there the stars did the rest.

6. Simmilar design can point to evolution from one species not just one animal. When you say creator I suspect you're trying to say something about religion.

7. Yes everything has a beginning.

8. Don't put religion into debates it's the one thing that I hate.

[Shikamaru Nara]

Originally Posted by chidoriroar

debate evolution

i do not agree with evolution

my arguments:

1. evolution states that creatures developed over long periods of time if so then there would be billions of intermediate creatures but despite us having 80% of earths fossil record we find no such creatures.

2. if creatures evolved from simple to complex then howecome creatures like the trilobite and the shark are more complex than creatures after them?

3. Darwin states that if there was an intelligent design that couldnt develop over a long period of time his theory would be destroyed. Bacteria is an example because all the parts need to work together at the same time. for more information search about it on you tube

4. if the universe was created by random events there would be no patterns but the golden ratio is a pattern

5. how could the big bang happen if there was nothing in the first place?

6. simmilar design mean the same creator not evolution.

7. the theory that the world is still expanding proves that the universe had a beggining

8. its possible that the big bang happened because god could have made it happen.

1. You proved yourself wrong. Long periods of time means that the fossils either descintegrated or just got buried too far for us to dig. We'd also have to look at what we think evolves into what, Human beings supposedly evolved from monkeys, and we have living proof that that is completely possible.
2. That is simple. It's because they may not have evolved from sharks. A shark is not a fish, this is scientifically proven.
3. Where's your proof that things actually haven't evolved?
4. It's not a pattern. It just is.
5. The big bang may or may not be real.
6. There is no creator, just reproduction.
7. Of course it did, but it evolved into the universe we have today.
8. As far as we know, God is a figment of our imagination because nobody has actually seen him, there's a reason it's called faith. Because some believe in it, but others may not.

Evolution is proven to be real by all of the statements above.

[Zaori Momochi]

Half of your questions have nothing at all to do with evolution.

[chidoriroar]

Originally Posted by Rotate

I thought this was going to say how debates have changed over the course of time.

1. We find a few intermediant creatures but most of the debree the creature leaves behind like bones, are destroyed. If you find a fossil it will only be in sedimentary rock. Though that 80% could just be an estimate.

2. Creatures evolve to help survive their surroudings. Sometimes the simplest creatures are the best survivors which is why they don't need to be complex.

3. Not sure about what you're asking but I'm too lazy to look it up on youtube

4. I don't know what the golden ratio is and again I'm too lazy to look it up right now.

5. There was a quick flare of heat that produced Hydrogen and Helium. Which in term produced galaxies which held clusters of stars. The heat cooled down too quickly for anything else to form. From there the stars did the rest.

6. Simmilar design can point to evolution from one species not just one animal. When you say creator I suspect you're trying to say something about religion.

7. Yes everything has a beginning.

8. Don't put religion into debates it's the one thing that I hate.

still most fossils are recognizable when they are found, and heat cant be produced without particles.

[Shikamaru Nara]

They're actually not normally recognizable at first sight, it takes examination.

[chidoriroar]

All these arguments are totally pathetic. if birds evolved from reptiles than we should have found at least one intermediate creature.

[Zaori Momochi]

Originally Posted by chidoriroar

All these arguments are totally pathetic. if birds evolved from reptiles than we should have found at least one intermediate creature.

Ever heard of the pterodactyl?

[Shikamaru Nara]

Originally Posted by chidoriroar

All these arguments are totally pathetic. if birds evolved from reptiles than we should have found at least one intermediate creature.

If they're all pathetic, how come you haven't come up with a response for my debate?

[Sasori_X]

Remember, its only a theory and not a fact. In order for us to actually know we need a time machine that can let us go back in time and accelerate it (by alot) to see if evolution truly did take place. However we already have enough evidence to prove that evolution could have taken place. Heck, it might be happening right now as we speak just at a very slow pace.

[ItachiAnbu]

Originally Posted by chidoriroar

All these arguments are totally pathetic. if birds evolved from reptiles than we should have found at least one intermediate creature.

LOL

While the Pterodactyl is not, to my knowledge, closely related to birds, there is a HUGE counter example to your argument here: Archaeopteryx

What is this creature? Here you go: http://www.fossilmuseum.net/fossilpi...haeopteryx.htm

[The Demon Zabuza]

Originally Posted by chidoriroar

debate evolution

i do not agree with evolution

my arguments:

1. evolution states that creatures developed over long periods of time if so then there would be billions of intermediate creatures but despite us having 80% of earths fossil record we find no such creatures.

2. if creatures evolved from simple to complex then howecome creatures like the trilobite and the shark are more complex than creatures after them?

3. Darwin states that if there was an intelligent design that couldnt develop over a long period of time his theory would be destroyed. Bacteria is an example because all the parts need to work together at the same time. for more information search about it on you tube

4. if the universe was created by random events there would be no patterns but the golden ratio is a pattern

5. how could the big bang happen if there was nothing in the first place?

6. simmilar design mean the same creator not evolution.

7. the theory that the world is still expanding proves that the universe had a beggining

8. its possible that the big bang happened because god could have made it happen.

1: How do you know we've found 80% of fossils? By definition, we don't know what we haven't found. Besides, it's very difficult to make a fossil, some creatures may not have survived.

2: It's survival, not becoming more comlex.

3: Ah, you're talking about the example of an eye. All parts of an eye work together, how could they have developed separately? The answer is simple, they developed at the same time. A bacteria that could detect changes in light survived better, so survived. Over time, that ability evoved into a retina. A genetic mutation meant that a lens was accidentally formed over a retina, and it was suddenly clearer. The components didn't evolve separately, they evolved at the same time.

4: Think about it. There could be a pattern between the number of electrons and the flexibility of the element. There isn't. There are millions of possible patterns that could have formed, that one did isn't that surprising. Oh, and since the golden ratio has to do with nature, it could just be a freak of evolution.

5: We don't know, but science has promised to get back to us.

6: Or evolution.....

7: Yes, it does. And this beginning was almost certainly the big bang.

8: Science promised to call.

[Kingsnoke]

Originally Posted by chidoriroar

debate evolution

i do not agree with evolution

my arguments:

1. evolution states that creatures developed over long periods of time if so then there would be billions of intermediate creatures but despite us having 80% of earths fossil record we find no such creatures.

2. if creatures evolved from simple to complex then howecome creatures like the trilobite and the shark are more complex than creatures after them?

3. Darwin states that if there was an intelligent design that couldnt develop over a long period of time his theory would be destroyed. Bacteria is an example because all the parts need to work together at the same time. for more information search about it on you tube

4. if the universe was created by random events there would be no patterns but the golden ratio is a pattern

5. how could the big bang happen if there was nothing in the first place?

6. simmilar design mean the same creator not evolution.

7. the theory that the world is still expanding proves that the universe had a beggining

8. its possible that the big bang happened because god could have made it happen.

Kingsnoke responds.

1) First off, there are Transitional fossils. Some include: Archaeopteryx (Dinosaurs to Birds), Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus(Both Transitional towards Modern Homo Sapiens), and the Genus Tulerpeton (Fish to Tetrapods{midway}). Also No one knows how much of the Fossil Record is discovered.

2) It is survival of the Fittest, Trilobites and Sharks had optimized their competitive abilities, and there for have not needed to change much.

3) Kingsnoke cites TDZ's argument, for he could not say it better.

4) This has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to due with evolution.

5) See above.

6) What is Chidoriroar even trying to say here.

7) Again, Nothing to due with evolution

8)Kingsnoke does not debate theoretical physics. Particularly on a thread titled DEBATE EVOLUTION.

Read a book on what you debate before you go and make a debate over it. Your arguments (The ones on Evolution) are full of holes.

[chidoriroar]

Originally Posted by ItachiAnbu

LOL

While the Pterodactyl is not, to my knowledge, closely related to birds, there is a HUGE counter example to your argument here: Archaeopteryx

What is this creature? Here you go: http://www.fossilmuseum.net/fossilpi...haeopteryx.htm

dont make me laugh! that doesnt proove any thing so what if it had hooked claws, and jaws. i already explained that the simmilaritys are due to the same designer. it doesnt really have many reptile features.

[Kingsnoke]

Originally Posted by chidoriroar

dont make me laugh! that doesnt proove any thing so what if it had hooked claws, and jaws. i already explained that the simmilaritys are due to the same designer. it doesnt really have many reptile features.

Who are you to say that?

You aren't an archaeologist.

Also, please review Kingsnoke's above argument.

Edit: Where did you previously explain Archaeopteryx? I do not see it anywhere above.

[chidoriroar]

all these transitional fossils dont include much evidence. And no one has refuted my argument about bacteria wich completely destroys evolution.

[chidoriroar]

Originally Posted by Kingsnoke

Who are you to say that?

You aren't an archaeologist.

Also, please review Kingsnoke's above argument.

Edit: Where did you previously explain Archaeopteryx? I do not see it anywhere above.

just above.

[Kingsnoke]

Originally Posted by chidoriroar

all these transitional fossils dont include much evidence. And no one has refuted my argument about bacteria wich completely destroys evolution.

You're denying evidence Presented to you?

Bacteria is unicellular so it would have all evolved at the same time, Kingsnoke is unsure how this disproves evolution. Kingsnoke is not quite sure what Chidori roar is saying here.

[chidoriroar]

Originally Posted by Kingsnoke

You're denying evidence Presented to you?

Bacteria is unicellular so it would have all evolved at the same time, Kingsnoke is unsure how this disproves evolution. Kingsnoke is not quite sure what Chidori roar is saying here.

im not denying im refuting.

[The Demon Zabuza]

Originally Posted by chidoriroar

all these transitional fossils dont include much evidence. And no one has refuted my argument about bacteria wich completely destroys evolution.

Ok... since you apparently either can't see my post, or don't want to argue against it, I'll take that as you have no counter for it. It explains how a bacteria evolved, with all the bits still working together.

Unless you can come up with some idea as to why it might be wrong, I suggest you concede.