we are haveing a huge ddebate at our school on evilution V.S. creation, and man I am just stuck. I need some arguments I mean some good ones we are loosing. I am on the creationists side and am like the best debator on our side, and am the only one doing the work and I need some good,real stuff on how I can beat them at this. I need to prove that creation was what happend. so just please help seriously it would be greatly appreciated.
we are haveing a huge ddebate at our school on evilution V.S. creation
Tell ya what. How about, you don't refer to people who cleave to scientific explanations as "evil" and I won't refer to creationists as "boobs."
Maybe the reason you're getting your butt handed to you is because you're trying to substitute ad hominem for argument, and your opposition won't let you play that game? Just a thought.
Well, if you want to prove creationism, you'll have to prove:
1) That God exists 2) That the Bible is a literal record 3) That there's a physical barrier to species change
for starters. Then you'll have to explain the stuff that the scientific model does:
1) A well-ordered fossil record 2) Genetic evidence of common ancestry 3) Why the Earth appears to be as old as it does 4) Why we can observe things in the universe that must be older than 6,000 years old 5) Why there appear to be no major discontinuities between species 6) Why organisms just don't seem to be "designed" that intelligently
Good luck. If you can prove creationism, you'll be the first.
ok, see god can not come into the subject because it is beleif. I have to convince then with some kind of evidence, this is a big part of my grade. I am only a junior in highschool but yes just try to like put into words a 11th grader would understand. like try to tell me, how, and why and that type of stuff. you get what I am saying?
I need some arguments I mean some good ones we are loosing. I am on the creationists side and am like the best debator on our side, and am the only one doing the work and I need some good,real stuff on how I can beat them at this.
Good luck, man. You're going to need it.
Did you get assigned to defend the creationist position, or did you volunteer for it?
If you are a Christian now, and if you volunteered with any intent of defending Creationism in order to defend your faith, I think it is very important that you somehow come to terms with the notion that the literal truth of mainstream Creationism should not be essential to an honest Christian faith. If you let your faith rest on the truth of mainstream Creationism, you may wind up severely disillusioned when you are confronted with the facts.
The theory of evolution was not concocted by scientists with an anti-God or anti-Christian intent. It is the most reasonable scientific interpretation of the evidence. It's neither anti-Allah, nor anti-Ganesha, etc... The theory of evolution does not necessarily exclude God or gods as the creator(s), however the theory is forumlated in such a way that references to God are unnecessary for the evolutionary hypothesis to be valid.
I think that would be your most poignant line of argument. Mainstream Creationism (that which posits a less-than-10,000-year-old-earth, sponatneous "popping into existence" of all the earthly "kinds", a worldwide flood, etc...) has been falsified. Still, this does not mean that God does not exist, nor that He did not create the universe utilizing/guiding evolution to suit His will. God can still be the creator, and it's not wrong to believe that He is while simultaneously knowing that evolution occurs and is responsible for the diversity of life on our planet.
umm yess :ae: but its just so hard to prove that I can not put that into words for a debate, I am trying all day and night to find help and info on it and I used to study the bible but, dont know I do not consider myself as a christion but if I had to go into a religion that would be the one. but I do beleive in god and that is why I chose to go onto this side.
ok, see god can not come into the subject because it is beleif.
I have the same question as crashfrog. It seems like the deck was really stacked against you in this debate. Not that I disagree with the reasons that they've limited you in this way, but if they were not going to allow references to a creator, then in my opinion there is no real debate in the first place.
ok ok sorry let me rephrase that, I ment the bible cant come into effect, the bible cant be brought in as use, but god can come into the debate so yes have any thing you could help me with? going to lunch and then will be right back.
ok ok sorry let me rephrase that, I ment the bible cant come into effect, the bible cant be brought in as use, but god can come into the debate so yes have any thing you could help me with?
Cool, that makes some more sense.
I would return to my original suggestion, then. Argue that evolutionism and creationism are not mutually exclusive. Evolution does not falsify every form of creationism. It is entirely possible that God (or any not-specific-to-the-Christian-Bible god) created the universe to produce life through the natural mechanisms that are described by the theory of evolution. This possibility cannot be disproven (which is why it is not included in scietific hypotheses). It's always possible, but since it can't be unambiguously verified through objective tests, it is unscientific -- but that doesn't mean that it's untrue!
I thought religion was kept seperate from school nowdays anyway? Surely this debate must be a religious subject and therefore a bit risky for a school to ask for anyway?
Well if you want to do well just debate the best reasons you can. Teachers aren't looking for a winning team but for presentation, research and effort. Do the best you can and you should be graded accordingly. Just hope your opposition haven't done their research in some areas and you can get one up on them. There are creationist claims that sound good on the surface, but with research often fall through, but of course in a debate situation there is no time to research counters, so you could get in some points that way. The best ones to use are the ones that require heaps of scientific knowledge to put down. So start with evolution takes so long you can't see it to test it. Man can't create life, just amino acids which aren't life. In theory you would need two creatures to evolve together for breeding, if one frog left the sea it would die alone. Mention freaky animals like the platypus, what the hell did that thing evolve from? And mention the stranger fossils, such as the ones that point to dinosaurs evolving into whales. Label evolution as only theory, that even the scientists admit has gaps (quote darwin if possible), whereas creationism has been an accepted idea for thousands of years. You can in theory argue almost any point, just got to think how hard will this point be to refute?
I would like to thank you too :ae: you put out some good info for me I am reserching some stuff on that right now, thanx again you two I will keep you updated on this about our debate and see how its goin and wish me the best of luck lol your right I am going to need all the luck I can get.
One thing you could do is to put your arguments here.
There are lots of us who will point out to you what we consider to be the flaws in them and then you will at least be prepared for them.
There are no new creationist arguments. Therefore there are lots of refutations of them available and your debate opponents will find them so you might as well be ready for them.
The only way to "win" is a combination of demonstrated excellent debating skills and the "God and science are NOT at odds" approach. Trying to defend 'creationism' (as it is usually defined) is very tough indeed.