CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
I don't think you understand what being labelled a scientific theory entails. Evolution is a scientific theory, which means there was a hypothesis and it is backed by a plethora of experiments and studies that all point towards one conclusion.
Do you not know that gravity is also a scientific theory? Heliocentricity (the idea that the Earth revolves around the Sun) is called the Heliocentric theory. Einstein's theory of relativity? Even plate tectonics is a scientific theory, yet you don't see creationists against these ideas being taught. Only the ones that clash with their ignorant, outdated beliefs.
I don't think you understand what being labelled a scientific theory entails. Evolution is a scientific theory, which means there was a hypothesis and it is backed by a plethora of experiments and studies that all point towards one conclusion.
Do you not know that gravity is also a scientific theory? Heliocentricity (the idea that the Earth revolves around the Sun) is called the Heliocentric theory. Einstein's theory of relativity? Even plate tectonics is a scientific theory, yet you don't see creationists against these ideas being taught. Only the ones that clash with their ignorant, outdated beliefs.
I was asking a question, so I would appreciate if you'd answer first, and then we can move on. Apparently this is happening a lot with people refusing to answer my questions, so yea.
Okay, sure. Have any creationist theories been unproven? No, because they have no scientific basis in the first place. There's no evidence that a god exists.
I believe I answered that question, I said ALL. Creationist "theories" are not theories at all, THEY ARE MYTHS. I think the "myth" of Adam and Lilith is just as "credible" as Adam and Eve. I believe there WAS a MAN named Jesus. Very charismatic, very influential. We still have those today but HE influenced a small area of people who NEEDED something to believe in. Today, he would have to influence the whole world to generate as much following. The "miracles" have no PROOF, only the myth. The "Son of God" has no proof, only the myth.
Evolution isn't a fact, it's a theory. It's called the Theory of Evolution for a reason. I do agree with you in that creationism has no place in a classroom, unless it's a devout Christian school.
Evolution is both fact and theory , people like you use the term “ theory “ little realizing what the term actually means scientifically ......
Wiki
Many scientists and philosophers of science have described evolution as fact and theory, a phrase which was used as the title of an article by paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould in 1981. He describes fact in science as meaning data, not absolute certainty but "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent". A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of such facts. The facts of evolution come from observational evidence of current processes, from imperfections in organisms recording historical common descent, and from transitions in the fossil record. Theories of evolution provide a provisional explanation for these facts.
You seem to lack an understanding of the scientific community and what it means to have an idea labeled a scientific theory. Gravity is also a scientific theory. As is plate tectonics, and relativity. Calling something a scientific theory basically means it is fact found by human research rather than concrete laws of physics. Evolution has an uncountable number of studies that point to the same conclusion that evolution is a real thing. Why aren't you arguing on whether plate tectonics are real? Do you doubt them just because you lack the knowledge of what a scientific theory is?
Yes, gravity is a scientific theory. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated claim, correct? I'm not saying evolution shouldn't be taught in schools, I'm simply saying evolution is a theory, like gravity or the Big Bang.
Okay, so what's your point? "A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of such facts". So, if religions were well-substantiated, would that make them scientific theories?
You do understand that Evolution is accepted as fact ?
Many things in the past were accepted as fact, like being gay was a disease and the belief that slavery was required for a successful economy. So, let me ask you: You do understand that not everything accepted as a fact is a fact?
Many things in the past were accepted as fact, like being gay was a disease and the belief that slavery was required for a successful economy.
Evolution is based on mountains of evidence that totally support the findings , congratulations you put yourself in the camp of assorted religious nuts who get their facts from answer in genesis
You do understand that not everything accepted as a fact is a fact
I look forward to reading your peer reviewed paper which demonstrates Evolution is not fact
It certainly was not please produce your links to the mountains of evidence you speak of ,also I'm talking about pure science and yet you come up with yet another bizzare analogy.
As well as the argument for slavery
Again produce your " mountains " of evidence supporting your slavery claims ?
It isn’t a fact
It is , your ignorance of such demonstrates how uneducated you are ,
Scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. In that respect, the past and continuing occurrence of evolution is a scientific fact. Because the evidence supporting it is so strong, scientists no longer question whether biological evolution has occurred and is continuing to occur. Instead, they investigate the mechanisms of evolution, how rapidly evolution can take place, and related questions.
I don’t need to write a peer reviewed paper
I know , why not instead continue to make claims you cannot back up ?
We agree again, gadfly. will wonders never cease? I believe everyone has the right to believe (and teach) what they want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone or interfere with societies wishes in general.
If evolution is a fact, why is it still called "The Thoery of Evolution"? Why hasn't it been changed? I disagree with that last part because I myself am a creationist, but so are other kids, and we shouldn't say evolution is a fact, and it shouldn't be required learning, because everyone has their own beliefs. But if there are kids that believe in evolution, it is their own belief, and they can learn it somewhere else.
Do a little research and you'll find that the argument "oooh its THEORY of evolution, theory doesn't mean fact so ha" is a very ignorant reach. You have no understanding on how extensive something must be research and backed before it is given the title scientific theory. If you choose not to believe in evolution only because it is called theory of evolution; you don't believe in gravity, plate tectonics, or relativity.
Why dont we teach all subjects? Have classes/electives where you can learn about these things and their contradicting theories. I think that class would be more interesting than fucking band class or art.
When a subject is included it should be in a relevant class. Evolution is a scientific theory and it is appropriate for a biology class. Creationism is appropriate if the high school offers a world religions class. And a history class could appropriately teach BOTH evolution and creationism as alternative explanations of history.
Demanding a biology class include creationism is just as inappropriate as demanding a religion class include evolution.
Microevolution is proven true by selective breeding. Anyone who denies this is mentally ill.
Macroevolution is where the debate is. I believe in creationism. The species were created somewhat supernaturally/randomly and from there the competing began.
Considering that you think the universe is a simulation your position is somewhat reasonable. However, I have already gone over why I don't think it is a simulation in another thread and even if it was, I think evolution would still be more likely. After all, the main purpose of the simulations is probably scientific in nature, part of their purpose could be to witness how life begins and evolves in a natural universe.
The fool has said in their heart that there is no God.........................................................................................................
