CreateDebate


Debate Info

11
39
True. Wait..., what? No!!!
Debate Score:50
Arguments:54
Total Votes:54
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 True. (10)
 
 Wait..., what? No!!! (34)

Debate Creator

jolie(9810) pic



The problem with evolution

OK, so once the very first representative of a species is born, he will have to find the second representative of that species.  I suspect there can't be many representatives because, after all, it is a new species.  Now, by definition, a new species cannot mate with the old species.  So..., if the first representative can't find another representative of the opposite sex to mate with, then that new species will die out.

Let's say a new species of human is born.  He has great, big, feet.  That's his evolutionary advantage.  His great, big, feet allow him to surf the oceans' waves without a surfboard.  This is an advantage for when a tsunami hits, he can surf to safety.  Now, with his great, big, feet he can con women who believe the big-feet-myth to sleep with him.  But alas, he cannot get them pregnant.  So he gets a post-grad degree in biology and finds out that the reason he can't reproduce is because he is the future of man-kind, a new species and living proof of the evolutionary theory.  But he can't tell his professors because they will out him in order to get fame and glory (University of Whatever professor discover the next evolutionary link).  And he knows that humans have a history of killing anything that is different from them so he decides that it is best to keep his condition a secret.  Plus he has read a lot of comics and decides to become a super hero and call himself "Super Surfer".  So he sews 2 big 'S's on his wet suit (because he still gets cold, like everyone else) while surfing.  This dislike for the cold is his weakness.  He is specifically susceptible to ice.  So, he can't play hockey, for example, because his great, big, feet get cold.  His job as a super hero is to educate people on the virtues of evolution so that he can someday come clean and let the world know that he is a new species.  But as luck would have it, the masses rise up and clamor for Trump to be president.  This is a threat to his existence so he becomes a Hillary supporter.  And in order to spread his message far and wide he joins a popular social media group with a propensity to debate.

Meanwhile, on the opposite coast is the female representative of their species.  But she is shunned because she has great, big, feet and when she walks barefooted they make a slapping sound so they call her Slappy.  She too is unable to reproduce.  They need to find each other so that they can create the next generation of great, big, feet babies or their species will die out.  Maybe if there were a tsunami on both coasts at the same time they can surf towards each other but what are the chances of that?  Nature has played a cruel joke on our hero.


Disclaimer:
Any similarities to actual species, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

True.

Side Score: 11
VS.

Wait..., what? No!!!

Side Score: 39
1 point

His nemesis is also a member of the social media group. He's no average joe and he deduces SS's true nature. He thus sets multiple traps meant to get SS to incriminate himself. He does this by posting debates of dubious value discrediting evolution; which SS is unable to ignore and is thus forced to come the rescue of evolution and set the record straight. ;)

What drives this nemesis? Why does this nemesis like to torment our hero? He does it for the lolz ;)

Side: True.
jolie(9810) Clarified
1 point

SS also needs a side kick. We'll call him... Cartman ;)

Side: True.

Hey, I have big feet, I mean I have my shoes made at Harland & Wolff's shipyard, and I have been successful at multiplying the human species for decades. The secret to having a successful, ''KNEE WOBBLER' is to have a chopper bigger than your feet.

As for water sports, well in Belfast Lough you don't really water ski, you just go through the 'motions'.

Side: True.
1 point

Do you own a wet suit with 2 large S's sewn on the front?

Side: True.
Winklepicker(1021) Clarified
1 point

Yeah, along with some text;- Don't photobomb me, this is going up as my ''Selfie Sunday''.

Side: True.
2 points

The problem with your hypothetical question on a "first member of a species" is that, well, technically, or should I say, Biologically, there is no such thing as a "first member."

Doesn't work that way. There was no, for example, first human. Or even, first homo sapien, or first homo habilis, or first homo erectus.

Rather, these sub-species "transitioned" into one another, in a mode of evolutional and biolgogical ascension. It was was a gradual transition. Powered by subtle genetic changes that were inherited by the species. And then passed on little by little to their offspring. Providing, of course, that said genetic mutations, or changes, proved to be advantageous to that species for living and thriving in its specific environment.

This is why we have all those so-called "transitional fossils." And no..there is no missing link. It is a subtle, gradual, very lengthy, transitory biological process.

An example I sometimes like to use for laymen to help illustrate the idea of there being no distinct, concrete, indisputable "first" or "original" of a species (or a sub-species) is my salt water metaphor.

Say you have a big-ass 200-gallon container of fresh water. That container is an original species and its DNA genome.

Now....take a single teaspoon of salt. Dump it into the container.

This step represents the first in a process of inherited genetic mutations that are "selected IN" as we say. Rather than "selected out" in the case of non-desirable mutations.

So...you dump in a single teaspoon of salt into a 200-gallon container of fresh water.

Is it Saltwater now? I mean, REAL, indisputable, legitimate, "salt water?" No....not compared to what will in time become real, full-fledged "species" if salt water.

So you after a few hundred or thousand years, dump in ANOTHER teaspoon of salt water. And three hundred years later, another teaspoon.

When is it "The First Species of Salt Water?"

See? It never really is. It is always evolving into a "higher form" or more concentrated form of salt water. You are slowly transitioning that fresh water into salt water. Step by step. Without a pre-determined definition or parameter of what exactly constitutes Salt Water--say, what percentage of salt need be present in the water--you can never really term it to be "The Very First Moment of Salt Water Species."

This of course is a drastically over-simplified metaphor for the process of genetic evolution, but I hope it at least illustrates my point that there is no "First" of an evolving species.

Thanks.

SS

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
cownbueno(407) Clarified
1 point

I'm not sure how this all can still seem so conceptually difficult to understand? If someone can't understand it in these terms, there's no hope.

Side: True.
1 point

The problem with evolution is that you don't understand how it works? Why is this a problem with evolution and not your ability to understand?

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
2 points

When will you stop taking my posts seriously and start taking them for the satire that they are?

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
2 points

Cartman is nothing more than a angry Democrat yet it claims that it isn't a Democrat. Tell tale signs are all there Democrats don't understand humor.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

When they start being funny.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

You are confused because what you think is one species immediately turning into a new one is actually one species turning into many at once. Chimpanzees didn't turn into humans, the same ancestor turned into many kind of hairy primate an humans were the least hairy that is all. At the beginning everyone could mate with everyone, like different breeds of dogs can with each other, but eventually each sect stayed to itself. the neanderthal had 2 subspecies, the humans actually wiped out the shorter stouter one with out intelligence, some of the other species became Inuits and the Asians or native Americans we know today. The other party of humans originated as blacks and while blacks dominated in tribal wars, they had a disadvantage at long distance warfare as the aim of Asians was far superior and so the shorter species again found a way to maintain itself. Over the years, the blacks mated with the yellow Asians to form Malays and Mongols who then split up further and some very brown factions again mated with the shorter Asian side of 'humans' which led to the Indian race we know today. Whites were the result of light skinned Indians realizing their skin helped them camouflage and survive better in snowy conditions so the lighter skinned ones mated with each other over and over again. The reason why Indians are shorter than white people on average is because they first evolved into Arabs, and in the desert you want height but the Arabs evolved into Jews towards colder conditions and Jews are again short (easier to hide in snowy conditions if you are short, being tall and thin is bad insulation). Ten the Jews and the light skinned Indians because to mate and make what we call Caucasians today. The original whites were more like what Albanians look like.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
DBCooper(2194) Disputed
1 point

Chimpanzees didn't turn into humans was only apes that did then ? Knuckle dragging apes evolved into woman in what way ?

Side: True.
SlapShot(2608) Clarified
2 points

Chimps never turned into humans.

Nor did apes.

And we are NOT descended from them.

Rather...we homo sapiens only share a distant common ancestor. Period.

Please, please take three minutes to read this link. It is high time you Creationists at least have some remote idea of the Theory that you seem so fond of mercilessly and cluelessly bashing every fucking day.

SS

http://www.livescience.com/32503-why-havent-all-primates-evolved-into-humans.html

Side: True.
1 point

Fallen angels, corrupted seed.

Giants, cannibalism, and other unrighteous atrocities are the contributions of shape shifters who saw the daughters of men were beautiful and took them as wives.

And the core of man grew out of its darkness.

I'm not saying this as fact, or doctrine, just possibility.

Job and Genesis touch on this, and the Book of Enoch may have purposely been held back as Divine Inspiration for later explanations of mysteries, man wasn't ready for, but it may be a book to review in the last days. Jude in the new testament refers to quotes from Enoch.

And there are a few mentions in the Bible to knowledge sealed till the end.

https://heavenawaits.wordpress.com/satan-dna/

Above is on a shelf for me, so I'm stating it as mere thought.

What if fallen angels did enhabit a form like man, before Adam? Creatures who formed in darkness. Demons have been known to take form of man, beast, and angels of light.

What if dinosaurs also, the lizard type, not mamal nor fish? It would make sense with my theory of interpretation of Creation Days.

Day 1 light

Day 2 Firmament

Day 3 Growth of plant and bugs, and lower forms of cell mutations, and possibly lizards and amphibians, maybe even Neanderthals.

Day 4 Time and Photosynthesis, where sun light effects growth

Day 5 - first 24 hrs day - Fish and Birds

Day 6 Man and Mammals

Genesis 2 is Garden specific, man made from dust outside of the Garden, then put into the garden, God made animals and brought to man to name. Possibly these are what was known as "clean" animals, yet none suitable as a partner to Adam, not from the ground of the Garden, Woman taken from the rib of man.

Making man neutral between the Garden and the World, with free will to live according to either.

God enriched the earth fossil fuels, maybe just enough for the number of our days on the earth.

What if explanations are greater than religion and science?

Is it possible by Day 5 Dinosaurs like lizards and amphibians became extinct and neanderthal also mutated to counterfeit and mimic the image of man in the image of God?

Is that why The earth so quickly filled where God had to destroy it by flood. Genesis says the Nephilim were before and after the flood. What if before it was so heavily saturated by corrupted seed we wouldn't have lasted for the 6000 years?

What if the flood was a needed reset, all in His plan.

And again the Nephilim came upon the earth but at a more slowed down rate?

.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
SlapShot(2608) Disputed
1 point

Bronze Age Hebrew Fables and Superstition have no place whatsoever on a debate about the science of Evolution. Or on a debate regarding any sort of science or realism.

On any other debate site I have ever participated in or moderated, you would be banned from this debate and probably even suspended from the site for a few days at least for hijacking it with such nonsensical and laughable tripe.

Your post here is no more than trolling. While I usually admire Andy's hands-off approach and his insistence on hardly ever banning trolls here, sometimes--like now--I DO wish he would at least make some efforts to stop people from hijacking debates with pure unadulterated bullshit like your bible fables.

Oh well......every site has its downside and I guess that here on CD it is this sort of crap. I would love for you to try this shit over at a more structured site like Debate.Org, however. You wouldn't last two days.

SS

Side: True.
KNHav(1957) Disputed
1 point

I'm still waiting for your responses. You haven't given one argument at all undoing the Prophetic and Historical credibilty of "Bronze Age God"

You really don't have a good answer, your obviously stumped.

And my post was very fitting the debate is discussing Neanderthals and the beginning, so this is not trolling. It angers you because you don't have a good answer.

Why does God anger you?

And I'm still waiting for your arguments on Credibilty of History and Prophesy. Don't break a blood vessel!

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
KNHav(1957) Disputed
0 points

Evolutionism claims that over billions of years everything is basically developing UPWARD, becoming more orderly and complex.

However, this basic law of science (2nd Law of Thermodynamics) says the opposite.

The pressure is DOWNWARD, toward simplification and disorder.

Their energy is transformed into lower levels of availability for further work.

The natural tendency of complex, ordered arrangements and systems is to become simpler and more disorderly with time.

Thus, in the long term, there is an overall downward trend throughout the universe.

Ultimately, when all the energy of the cosmos has been degraded, all molecules will move randomly, and the entire universe will be cold and without order.

To put it simply: In the real world, the long-term overall flow is downhill, not uphill.

All experimental and physical observation appears to confirm that the Law is indeed universal, affecting all natural processes in the long run.

Read more at: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-thermodynamics.html

Read more at: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-thermodynamics.html

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!