CreateDebate


Debate Info

33
16
Yes No
Debate Score:49
Arguments:30
Total Votes:60
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (17)
 
 No (11)

Debate Creator

jh1234l(17) pic



Is evolution supported by scientific fact?

Evolution is a theory that describes biological variety being created through the random process mutations, which are selected through the non-random process of natural selection. The theory of evolution is the subject of the Creation-evolution controversy, which was why this debate was created.

Yes

Side Score: 33
VS.

No

Side Score: 16

Evolution is SUPPORTED by scientific fact in multiple areas.

Some examples of these are a visible 'progression' of form in the fossil record, and varying amounts of overlap in the dna of different current and archaic species (where dna is recoverable) that also support the idea of a 'progression.'

The fossils we have found and their shapes are factual. The DNA we have sequenced is factual. The overlaps are factual. All of this supports the theory of evolution. That doesn't necessarily mean that evolution is conclusively proven, but all available data supports rather than debunks the current theory.

Side: Yes
4 points

Evolution is supported by scientific fact. Main arguments:

1. Contrary to popular belief, transitional fossils have been found. In fact, we have seen transitional fossils everywhere, and they do align up with what evolution predicts. [1] By transitional fossils, I mean the intermediate forms of evolution between organisms, not cartoonish half duck half crocodiles.

2.Speciation, or macroevolution has been observed. The creation of a new species of the goatsbeard plant that were fertile, but could only breed with plants in the same species, is one example. [2]

[1]http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates

[2]http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html

Side: Yes
3 points

Yes, although it is common for people on both sides to misunderstand the issue. By evolution, we mean biological evolution. In its strictest term, biological evolution is change in allele frequencies among and between populations over time. The end result of this is that differing allele frequencies can lead to differing organisms.

Humans have been using these principals for thousands of years before we realized it. The domestication and forced evolution of countless plants and animals is a sign of this. The ability to identify, study and "read" DNA has very solidly established that changing genetics causes the change in organisms that are observed both in domestication and in the fossil record.

The theoretical part isn't whether this happens. It is fact that aleele frequencies change over successive generations and that these changes can and will have an effect on the organism's morphology. The theoretical part is whether natural selection is the cause of this and if this can cause different species and other taxonomical groups. A scientific theory is an attempt to explain a fact. The theory gets discarded once it has been successfully falsified just once. Evolution as a theory is has been around over 150 years, has had more research done on it than possibly any other theory, has had countless opponents attempting to discredit it, and has led to accurate predictions useful in medicine and zoology that would have been unlikely to be accurate if evolutionary theory was inherently inaccurate.

So, yeah, literally thousands of scientific facts have been found supporting evolution.

Side: Yes
1 point

In order for a hypothesis to become a theory it has to correspond with empirical evidence. Evolution is a working theory so per definition, it is supported by scientific facts.

Side: Yes

No, evolution is supported by god.

Side: Yes
1 point

if Dropigy was banned from CD community then why is he still on.

Side: No

Science can truly not prove anything. Over history, scientists have been wrong so many times. It is impossible to declare any scientific theory or law fact.

Side: No
MuckaMcCaw(1969) Disputed
1 point

Science can truly not prove anything.

True, but this debate is about facts, not proof. There is a difference.

It is impossible to declare any scientific theory or law fact.

You are right about the theories. They aren't meant to be facts though, so its irrelevant. Facts and laws are the "what" in scientific inquiry. Theories and hypothesis are the "why". We can't prove a theory because we know that we still don't understand everything about the universe, and there may be something unnoticed effecting the results.

Facts, on the other hand are recorded results. It doesn't matter much how advanced we are as a people, aside from the fact we will be looking at things in different ways as we get more advanced. The recorded observation is still valid, even if "why" it happened is not.

Side: Yes

There is no such thing as "scientific fact." That is the basis of science.

Side: No
3 points

Men have xy chromosomes. That is a scientific fact. .

Side: Yes
1 point

You don't get it, there's no such thing as scientific fact, so this whole debate is wonky to begin with.

Side: No
jh1234l(17) Disputed
2 points

The topic is whether evolution is supported by scientific fact, not if it is scientific fact. That is undebatable.

Side: Yes
2 points

He is saying that the scientific community doesn't recognize the idea of scientific fact. You are asking if a nonexistent idea is able to support evolution.

Side: Yes
Warjin(1577) Disputed
1 point

Your confusing fact with theory, true science in general is falsifiable with things that are not proven as fact but theory, if I were to say that it is fact that you will age this is true and this is scientific fact, however if i would say you will die for a fact in the next 100 years is not true or fact, because science could come up with ways to expand the human life to live for 1000` s of years, both those examples are measurements of science but one is scientific theory and one is fact, science is both fact and falsifiable.

Side: Yes
-2 points
jh1234l(17) Disputed
2 points

Science is not a false dichotomy, because science was not forcing you to choose between two black and white views (e.g. creationism and satan)

Side: Yes