Instigator
Points: 0

It is a fact that God put medicen in plants

Voting

The participant who scores the most points is declared the winner

The voting period will end in:
00:00:00:00
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Health
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Winner selection
Rating mode
Unrated
Characters per argument
7,000
Points: 2
Description
Burden of proof
I have to prove that it requires great intelligence to create the medicine in plants and only god can do it.
Con needs to show that it does not require intelligence to create medicine in plants and this medicine can come naturally via evolution and big bang
Round 1
Published:
Do not confuse my hatred for big pharma disclaimer


I want to make one thing clear. I despise modern medicine. one should use plants as medicine since they have better medicine in them then prescription drugs. This claim is amplified when 70 percent of prescription drugs are derived from plants. So why do we not use the natural stuff that is more effective and does not cause thoughts of suicide and yellow skin and eyes. Primitive people like ancient china ,the Indians used plants as medicine. this means they had 70 percent of modern medicine. Except there was natural and  was more effective. It  did not cause yellow skin and eyes and was not the 4th leading cause of death in the world.
Man always brags about how smart it is for creating modern medicine with knowledge and thinking and intelligence.Spending years researching  and doing scientific experiments to create prescription drugs.There clammering about there development with T cells. We always here people talk about the miracles of modern medicine. Yet god out did us 100000 times with the medicine found in nature. Every culture besides us took advantage of it. they did not need to use intelligence and knowledge to create medicine because that was already done with the herbs. Just brew a flower



talking point 1


There is this misconception that many people believe. They believe  scientist spend years making revolutionary life saving prescription drugs that treat all kinds of diseases.
It is believe that scientist created these drugs and they used a lot of thinking knowledge and intelligence to do so.

This is true  sometimes  but most of the time this is not what they do.Most of the time they just find a plant with amazing health properties and make a synthetic version of it. There synthetic drug has a lot of side effects like changes in behavior and thinking' thoughts off suicide' and yellow eyes and skin etc and is not revolutionary and or life saving. That is 100 percent false.



To date, 35,000-70,000 plant species have been screened for their medicinal use. Plants especially those with ethnopharmacological uses have been the primary sources of medicine for early drug discovery. Fabricant and Farnsworth, (2001) reported that, 80% of 122 plant derived drugs were related to their original ethnopharmacological purposes.

This is from a .gov site so no arguing with this this.

But the question still stand if scientist are not using thinking intelligence and or knowledge to create this medicine then who is.
it would have to be the one who is creating the plants. God created plants he must have been the one who used thinking intelligence and knowledge to create these medicine. not the scientist.



Evolution can not use thinking intelligence and or thinking to create life saving medicine. so evolution could not have done it. creating some of the plants would take great intelligence








I  would even say that it is a fact that god put medicine in plants. There has been thousands of study's on the medical properties in plants i mean almost every day you her about a plant with medicine in it. Every culture used the medicine in plants the Indian used medicine in plants
the Chinese use to use medicine in plants etc almost every culture use the medicine god put in plants. we did this up until the 1900s throughout all of human history.


People are always talking about how great modern medicine is and that we are living longer because of drugs and these scientist are so smart they  use there great knowledge to make these drugs that traverse  the body and fixes kidneys and hearts etc. When it is god who used his his great knowledge to create medicine that traverses the body and fixes kidneys and hearts. All man did was add absurd side effects like thoughts of suicide yellow skin and eyes etc. primitive man had access to the same medicine  we got except are is synthetic and less effective and a billion times more dangerous.The stuff god created did not cause thoughts of suicide. He created plants with insane medical properties in which we derive are synthetic garbage from and then claim we created it and claim people will live till there 100 with this crud.but all it is is a bootlegged version of what is found in a stupid flower.



modern medicine is a bootlegged version of what god created.




70 percent of drugs coming from plants



Primitive man used plants as medicine. Which meas they had 70 percent of modern medicine back in the bc times. Except there was not synthetic and was not a billion times more dangerous and there medicine did not kill them. there medicine was more effective and no side effects


It is believed that scientist used great intelligence knowledge and thinking to create medicine. They did not create it but found it. But someone still has to use great intelligence knowledge and thinking to create this stuff. So who put medicine in plants. it would have to be god. he created these plants and thus the medicine.




simplified

In a resent debate Oramaji summarized my argument pretty well. this debate was mostly me finding site that said the earth was about me finding sites that said the moon was 27.3 size of the earth. and Omargi countering by doing his own math and getting a 27.25.but he summarized this argument pretty well so i am quoting him

oramaji symplified
P1: The development of pharmaceuticals requires intelligence
P2:  Some herbs found in nature have pharmaceutical qualities
C1: Therefore God in intelligent


me simplifying it

P1 These scientist claim to spend years researching and developing prescription drugs. and doing research and developing medicine takes knowledge though and intelligence

P2 They did not create it  but found it and prescription medication are just bootlegged herbal remedies

P3  They claim to create the drugs with intelligence and knowledge. But in reality they just found the medicine in the plants of the earth. It means someone used intelligence and knowledge to create the medicine and thus the plants of the earth


C1 God is the only one who can use intelligence and thinking to create life.SO he created the plants of the earth. Evolution can not do so





Prescription drug being the 4th leading cause of death

Published:
I thank Crossed for instigating this debate.
 
 
== Neg ==

C1. God is Not Required
Evolution of Plants
Pro underpins that medicine can be found in plants. Thus, my BoP is fulfilled if evolution entails the creation of plants without the need of divine intervention.  In logical formulation:
 
P1: Plants were created via evolution
P2:Evolution does not require divine intervention
P3:If P2 God was not needed to create plants
C:God was not needed to create plants.
 
Premise One
Studies suggest that the earliest plants evolved from a group of single-celled organisms called charophytes in the Middle Ordovician period, around 475 million years ago [1] [2].  This marked the birth of what is now referred to today as “green algae” – usurping its predecessor, the single-celled, photosynthesizing autotroph, through the random, but selective process of evolution. This continued, systematically diversifying and developing into more complex growth forms through evolved means of sexual reproduction [3].  Specifically, the series of evolutionary changes in the reproductive biology of plants in the Late Devonian period allowed plant life to flourish and populate the Earth.  This leap is what has led to the development of modern plant life we see today [3].  Thus, it can be seen that scientific research has accurately depicted when plant life first evolved and is verified by extensive a posteriori fossil records, demonstrating the evolutionary chain of events leading to the diverse community of plant life we have today [4].
 
Premise Two
It is noted that evolution occurs, primarily, because of natural selection, genetic drift, mutations and gene flow [5].  Under the framework of ontological naturalism, we would have no inference to believe that the closed laws of our universe (encompassing biology, chemistry and physics) require any external, or divine intervention to exist.  Believing that our natural laws (including phenomenon like abiogenesis and evolution) are innately contingent upon divine creation from a wholly intelligent entity, rather than natural processes of emergence would be unparsimonious. It is far more simplistic and parsimonious to have stock in the position of a metaphysical naturalist, rather than a theist when direct evidence of God hasn’t been demonstrated.  Thus, until Pro provides rectitude of God’s objective existence and contribution to modern medicine, it is prudent to prefer naturalism purely on the grounds of Occam’s Razor [6].
 
Premise Three
Is implied from the veracity of the second premise.
 
Conclusion
Thus, the conclusion logically entails.
 
 

== Rebuttals ==

Essentially, since some plants have medicinal properties they ought to have been created intelligently.  Pro has yet to justify this claim outside of a bare assertion.

“P1: The development of pharmaceuticals requires intelligence
P2:  Some herbs found in nature have pharmaceutical qualities
C1: Therefore God in intelligent”
 
Right off the bat, this syllogism is a non-sequitur; the conclusion cannot follow from the premises, as the conclusion cannot contain a new predicate that isn’t present in the aforementioned premises and can be prima facie rejected.

Pro has unjustly asserted plants are intelligently created and claims that the only fathomable cause is God.  This is essentially a lacklustre argument of design.

Pro ought to demonstrate why these claims have veracity – until then the resolution is negated.  Over to Pro
.
 
References
 

Round 2
Published:
Con says evolution created medicine in plants.This is impossible. how could evolution create a plant like turmeric with properties that can reverse damage done by schizophrenic medication. The answer is it can not. This would require great intelligence. Firstly it would need to be able to identify which part of the brain is broken. It would need the intelligence of 1000 brain surgeons know how to fix it.  It would need to have knowledge on how to traverse the brain. Since this plant does this it means that the creator would have to have knowledge of these things when creating it. just like how god programmed instincts in animal. For example i have a bunch of alpacas and they escaped. I did not train my dog to Herd my animals. But my dog herded them back into there pens. This is because god programmed my dog with those instincts. He created dogs specifically for that purpose of man. God would have had to program turmeric on knowledge on how to fix a brain. He would have to program in a map of the brain and the body so it can traverse it and program it with the ability to identify broken parts then fix them.






How can a plant do the work of 1000 neurosurgeons and heal damaged parts done by schizophrenic medication. the effects that this reverse is no small feet. It changes server behavior change. how could something like that be dome by evolution.


Mockery


Turmeric once did not have brain health benefits but someone died and there brains splattered on the ground. and as a result of that over millions of year a bunch of roots in the same area adapted with the splattered brain thus the roots got medical properties to heal brains.this is basically what your going to have to tell me. To make your point. When i was debating Ramshutu he kept saying something similar to this this but in a serious tone and i was like you make no sense. the part that was sold for so much was the curcumun the part that heals the brain so much




turmeric's antioxidants have been found to reverse the effects of damage caused by pharmaceuticals, particularly in the treatment of schizophrenia. Commonly-prescribed antipsychotics often cause involuntary muscle movements and severe behavioral changes








con claims evolution created plants. but the evolution process can not create medicine that can reverse damage done by schizophrenic medication.

It is noted that evolution occurs, primarily, because of natural selection, genetic drift, mutations and gene flow [5].  Under the framework of ontological naturalism, we would have no inference to believe that the closed laws of our universe (encompassing biology, chemistry and physics) require any external, or divine intervention to exist. 
A mutation caused a plant to have properties that fixes brain damage. that makes no sense along with all this other crud.


Premise One
Studies suggest that the earliest plants evolved from a group of single-celled organisms called charophytes in the Middle Ordovician period, around 475 million years ago [1] [2].  This marked the birth of what is now referred to today as “green algae” – usurping its predecessor, the single-celled, photosynthesizing autotroph, through the random, but selective process of evolution. This continued, systematically diversifying and developing into more complex growth forms through evolved means of sexual reproduction [3].  Specifically, the series of evolutionary changes in the reproductive biology of plants in the Late Devonian period allowed plant life to flourish and populate the Earth.  This leap is what has led to the development of modern plant life we see today [3].  Thus, it can be seen that scientific research has accurately depicted when plant life first evolved and is verified by extensive a posteriori fossil records, demonstrating the evolutionary chain of events leading to the diverse community of plant life we have today [4].
 
Premise Two
It is noted that evolution occurs, primarily, because of natural selection, genetic drift, mutations and gene flow [5].  Under the framework of ontological naturalism, we would have no inference to believe that the closed laws of our universe (encompassing biology, chemistry and physics) require any external, or divine intervention to exist.  Believing that our natural laws (including phenomenon like abiogenesis and evolution) are innately contingent upon divine creation from a wholly intelligent entity, rather than natural processes of emergence would be unparsimonious. It is far more simplistic and parsimonious to have stock in the position of a metaphysical naturalist, rather than a theist when direct evidence of God hasn’t been demonstrated.  Thus, until Pro provides rectitude of God’s objective existence and contribution to modern medicine, it is prudent to prefer naturalism purely on the grounds of Occam’s Razor [6].
It does require divine action. how can a root heal brain damage. how did people in biblical times know this to. Indians were also aware of its properties in the plants. and during Jesus time turmeric was worth more than gold. and scientist are finding out that your brain physically changes your brain. I believe it was worth more than gold is because god told them. same with the Indians expansive knowledge of medical properties. fun fact many people believe that the gold that the wise men gave to Jesus was turmeric.



speaking of this



Studies suggest that the earliest plants evolved from a group of single-celled organisms called charophytes in the Middle Ordovician period, around 475 million years ago


Evolution says humans came to be 200 thousand years ago. ferns popped up 360 million years ago according to fossil evidence.

Ferns have properties that help female with breast problems menopausal problems period stuff. it is very clearly meant to help a female human.

How does the fern have medical properties that help females humans. if humans did not come into existence for another 360 million years.

Dogs have period prob but the do not have breasts. chicken have breast but the do not have period problems this was designed to help humans girls.

If plants have properties that help humans. how did they get in the plants the creator would have to have humans in mind when he created the ferns. A bunch of nothing can not say
"hay i created these humans i better put medicine in these plants to help them out". but god can.



Published:
== Rebuttals ==

Evolution
Pro asserts that plants can be medicinal, therefore they must be created intelligently and evolution simply cannot provide an adequate explanation for the medicinal properties found in plants.  Pro has neither demonstrated why random mutations cannot result in medicinal properties even though it would provide a reasonable explanation why some plants are medicinal and others are toxic, nor has he provided evidence that God exists to even intelligently create plants.  If plants were created intelligently, how would it follow that many plants are not medicinal at all? Moreover, Pro conflates medicine found in plants with some immensley potent, all-curing drug -- clearly the medicine found in plants has its limitations which is why modern medicine isn't simply the prescription of carrots and parsely.  

Pro simply dismisses my opening round and commends that it is “crud”.  However, this is not a valid refutation.
 

Misc
Finally, Pro asks:

“How does the fern have medical properties that help females humans. if humans did not come into existence for another 360 million years.

It is irrational to assert that if something exists and happens to “help humans”, that it was created for the sole purpose to “help humans”.  It could be considered “unintelligent design” to create plants that “help humans” 360 million years before humans ever existed.  This would nullify Pro’s affirmation entirely.

Pro has yet to prove God’s existence and has yet to identify why the medicinal properties in plants are created intelligently beyond a bare assertion.

Over to Pro.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Round 3
Published:


con said

It is irrational to assert that if something exists and happens to “help humans”, that it was created for the sole purpose to “help humans”
Sweet Flag roots go up in the brain figures out which part of the brain that deals with stuttering and then fixes it.
Now you can say that sweet flag roots were not created for the purpose of humans but that would be wrong. Sweet flag intelligently goes up in the brain and fixes the part of people brains that deals with speaking. Now humans are the only ones who can talk and thus are the only ones who can have stuttering problems. thus it was specifically made to help humans. now besides the fact that going up in the brain and  being able to identify Which parts of the brain is broken and having the knowledge on how to fix the brain which is intelligence. con has failed to explain how a plant shows results of intelligence.


How can a plant be made specifically for the purpose of man if life was random. It would make sense if god created life would it not. humans are the only ones who can talk and are the only ones who can have stuttering problems. Sweet flag was made for stuttering problems and thus humans



con said
Pro has neither demonstrated why random mutations cannot result in medicinal properties even though it would provide a reasonable explanation why some plants are medicinal and others are toxic

This burden of proof is on con. He needs to show how a plant via mutation can cause a stupid root to become intelligent and heal damage brains done by schizophrenic medication.



when i say that a mutation can not do this i mean a mutation can not do this.


you claim that a mutation caused turmeric to get the medical properties That can heal a damaged brain.


But wait Turmeric is a DNA repair food.


turmeric stops your DNA from Mutating when consumed. So how can a mutation cause  the medical properties in turmeric. When turmeric is a DNA repair foods.

What about all the other DNA repair foods how did they get there health benefits. It can not be through Mutation











New point


Medical plants as you may know have been referred to as magical. Witches usually refer to there medical mushrooms as magic mushrooms.The problem is that these mushrooms are not magical nor are they as primitive as scientist make them out to be.Evolution scientist believe that a fern is just a tiny pine tree that did not evolved.
no a fern has a ton of medical properties that god intelligently created. Not magical like the witches  would say. though  they are right that these effects are amazing. It is not primitive like the scientist would make it out to be. plants have to be primitive for the big bang to be true. Because the big bang would not create something intelligent like turmeric.





Pro conflates medicine found in plants with some immensley potent, all-curing drug -- clearly the medicine found in plants has its limitations which is why modern medicine isn't simply the prescription of carrots and parsely.  

it would be better if modern medicine was carrot and parsley. turmeric heals a damaged brain. herbs there are no limitations.

clearly the medicine found in plants has its limitations

Witches refer to there mushrooms as magical but they are not magical god created it. the magical medical properties is not magic. Its just god showing his intelligence.






















































































I believe that the reason why there are poison plants is because god cursed the ground.




And to Adam he said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life

Published:
== Rebuttals ==

Misc

 
“it would be better if modern medicine was carrot and parsley. turmeric heals a damaged brain. herbs there are no limitations.”
Pro argues that with a balanced diet including ‘carrots’ and ‘parsley’ there are simply ‘no limitations’ to the medicinal potential.  Neither carrots, nor parsley can cure lung cancer – there are clearly limitations to plants.


Sweet Flag roots go up in the brain figures out which part of the brain that deals with stuttering and then fixes it.”
Even if Sweet Flag were to act so gallantly, it still doesn’t entail that a deity ought to have created them.

 
“ con has failed to explain how a plant shows results of intelligence.”
I argue that the plants possess medicinal properties as a by-product of their evolved nature; not that plants are intelligent insofar as they manoeuvre their way to the brain and fix individual ailments like a neurosurgeon.


“How can a plant be made specifically for the purpose of man if life was random. It would make sense if god created life would it not. humans are the only ones who can talk and are the only ones who can have stuttering problems. Sweet flag was made for stuttering problems and thus humans”
Pro is yet to answer how plants are intelligently designed by God when many plants are toxic to humans.  In fact, he answers this briefly at the end of the debate stating that God “cursed the ground” – yet if this were true and plants come from the ground, then the plants that are medicinal are also cursed?

 
when i say that a mutation can not do this i mean a mutation can not do this.”
Why can’t it? According to the fossil evidence I have provided there is a clear lineage of plant life dating over 300 million years.  The medicinal properties aren’t mutated with the purpose of helping humans, it was naturally mutated and passed along through natural selection.  The properties of medicine found in plants are beneficial to humans as a by-product of evolution, which explains why not all plants are medicinal.


 
 
Pro has yet to demonstrate the existence of God.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Round 4
Published:
Dude i would re read my last post because you did not really answer anything. Mind you my first 2 post could not be read do to grammar.pls explain how evolution created DNA repair plants with mutations.


co said

Why can’t it? According to the fossil evidence I have provided there is a clear lineage of plant life dating over 300 million years.  The medicinal properties aren’t mutated with the purpose of helping humans, it was naturally mutated and passed along through natural selection.  The properties of medicine found in plants are beneficial to humans as a by-product of evolution, which explains why not all plants are medicinal.
I already gave you the answer in the last round. DNA repair foods. How can a mutation create these plants. when these plants stop mutations and even repair them. If i eat DNA repair foods would i return to a monkey state. no i would not because humans were never monkeys.

How can a mutation/evolution create DNA repair food pls do not ignore this. like everyone else


The kiwi fruit industry wanted to know what medicinal purposes there plant had. so they funded a bunch of experiments. They found that when you consume a kiwi you repair 5 genes.




By video 2 They went forward with there experiments. But with other fruits and they found that the group that ate 4 different kinds of berries with  kiwi  repaired 25 genes. They ate bilberry raspberry blackberry kiwi and strawberry and repaired 25 genes. 5 genes per fruit.precise number 5







Bill Gate said

"Human DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created." Bill Gates.

We always here how things found in nature are ten billion times more advance then invention done by are smartest humans. But we are still to stupid to realize that the reason why things found in nature are more advance then inventions done by are smartest people is because the one creating it is a billion times smarter then our smartest people.aka god


DNA repair is a collection of processes by which a cell identifies and corrects damage to the DNA molecules that encode its genome.
so it is aware that something is wrong and is smart enough to correct the damage done by the molecule in the genome.That is intelligence. It is able to identify that there is a problem then he has the knowledge on how to fix it.

blueberry's help with DNA repair.




broccoli blueberry lemons green tee apples cellar y kiwi and water cress repair dna


when spinach and tomato are combined it repairs DNA

here is a study that was reported on by the same fellow. Anyway people who smoke there dna damage is 3 times higher then ours, But they found that if they eat turmeric there DNA damage returns back to normal.

The bible says god cursed the ground so people believe that plants are poisons because god cursed them after Adam ate the forbid an fruit.





Pro argues that with a balanced diet including ‘carrots’ and ‘parsley’ there are simply ‘no limitations’ to the medicinal potential.  Neither carrots, nor parsley can cure lung cancer – there are clearly limitations to plants
though they do not cure cancer. There effects are better then any prescription drug that i have seen

pigenin, a flavone in parsley, prevents the progression of cancer and halts tumor growth. According to research published in Oncotarget, apigenin inhibited an enzyme, which caused the multiplication of cancer cells. The herb was found especially helpful in preventing prostate, colorectal, and colon cancer. Both, fresh and dried parsley, have high levels of apigenin.
Also, parsley oil extract contains a compound called myristicin, which is a phenylpropane. A preliminary investigation into the effects of myristicin on laboratory rats revealed that it has anti-carcinogenic properties as it counteracts free radicals in the body.
So it is inhibits cancer cell growth. How can it tell the difference between good and bad cells and know to only attack the bad ones. Would that not be intelligence knowing that one thing is good and the other is bad and only attacking the bad




parsley does f##### everything


Reduces Risk of Osteoporosis

Relieves Flatulence

Boosts Immunity

Antibacterial & Antifungal Properties

Pain Relief

Relieves Symptoms of Anemia


Helps Eliminate Bad Breath

Heart Health

Balances Hormones

Eye Health

Hair Care

the rest of the 23 things


carats are the same thing
con said
“ con has failed to explain how a plant shows results of intelligence.”
no i have proved.

Saffron flowers help with learning disability.

It makes itself up to the brain able to identify which parts are broken and which parts he needs to go through. and has knowledge on how to fix the brain


the Intelligent parts are it has knowledge on how to fix a brain and is able to identify which parts are broken and seems to have a map because it traverses its way up there


This flower is not intelligent god is


saffron on the brain
Promotes learning and memory retention and treats age related impairment

Saffron contains certain active constituents which are known to produce positive effects in patients suffering from neuro degenerative disorders


Pro is yet to answer how plants are intelligently designed by God when many plants are toxic to humans.  In fact, he answers this briefly at the end of the debate stating that God “cursed the ground” – yet if this were true and plants come from the ground, then the plants that are medicinal are also cursed?

Adam could eat all the fruit he wanted except one fruit tree. Adam ate from that tree. God was like only one tree Adam. you can not eat these now. depending on your interpretation
Published:
== Rebuttals ==

DNA Repairing Plants
I am unsure what Pro’s argument is here.  I concur that some plants can be healthy for you and it’s interesting to know that plants can repair genes.  However, even in Pro’s own source it is stated:
“We’re going to get some DNA damage in our world, no matter how healthy our diets”
Kiwis aren’t powerful medicine.  Eating a healthy diet will reduce one’s chances of cancer, but it is dishonest to assert that plants are all-powerful medicine that will remedy one of all ailments.
 
 How can a mutation/evolution create DNA repair food pls do not ignore this. like everyone else”
I stated the mechanisms of evolution in the first round, but Pro dismissed it as “crud”.  Nonetheless, evolution is fundamentally predicated upon natural selection, genetic drift, mutations and gene flow [1].  It seems Pro disputes the veracity of genetic drift and mutations specifically, so I will explain how these mechanisms can certainly produce the properties we find in plants today.  From Pro’s source regarding kiwis, it is elucidated that some plants have these medicinal properties due to their high level of antioxidants.  The high level of antioxidants in plants could certainly be contingent upon evolution. Genetic drift is the random event where specific alleles (variations in traits) are sampled incorrectly, which can lead to the large genetic changes of a population through the Bottleneck and Flounder Effect [1].  The Bottleneck Effect occurs when a population rapidly diminishes and leads to the eradication of some (random) alleles in the gene pool.  This causes the population to become less diverse and more uniform.  The Founder Effect occurs when a new population is created by the collection of smaller entities from different populations.  Alike the Bottleneck Effect, this results in the diminishment of genetic diversity within the new population.  Mutations are the genetic changes in chromosomes and genes – they can be beneficial and detrimental.  Specifically, beneficial mutations can lead to the adaptability of a species; if a mutation is beneficial, it is more likely to be passed down and inherited by future generations via natural selection.  To tie this all together, the abundance of antioxidants found in plants would have been a beneficial mutation, which was passed down through natural selection and honed specifically to new populations via the Bottleneck Effect and/or the Founder Effect.  The need for the abundance of  antioxidants in plants is best explained as such:

 Plants derive their energy from sunlight via photosynthesis, which generates free radical byproducts call reactive oxygen species. Because both the ultraviolet light from the sun and the reactive oxygen species generated during photosynthesis would cause irreparable damage, plants produce antioxidants to protect themselves”[2] 

Hence, it can be seen that the high abundance of antioxidants could have been a beneficial mutation occurring very early in their evolutionary timeline and likely lasted due to natural selection.
 
 
Intelligent Design
I have demonstrated that the medicinal properties in plants could certainly be caused by evolution, therefore removing the necessity for intelligent design.  Moreover, Pro has still not proved God’s existence beyond God of the Gaps.


Conclusion
It has been demonstrated that plants could possess their medicinal qualities via the process of evolution. Pro’s burden is predicated on the existence of God, but he has failed to define what God is and has only provided that He must exist because plants were intelligently created.  Pro asked many questions like “how do plants know how to help people?”, but it is not the plant that is helping people as a whole, it is the specific properties found in plants that possess medicinal qualities.  The resolution is therefore negated.
 
Thanks for the debate, Crossed.
 
 
 
 
 
References
[1] http://nectunt.bifi.es/to-learn-more-overview/mechanisms-of-evolutionary-change/
[2] https://www.sunsaferx.com/health-and-wellness/antioxidants/

Added:
--> @TheAtheist
Almost every debate i do. I end up having 1000 characters over the character limit And i end up having to rewrite it.
Instigator
#6
Added:
--> @crossed
If you want them to be easier to read, only skip one or two lines. Not twenty. And in one of our recent debates, you skipped around a hundred lines - which makes me think that you're just trying to make your argument look larger.
#5
Added:
--> @TheAtheist
I thought it makes it easier to read. But maybe its only easier for me
Instigator
#4
Added:
Why does crossed skip twenty lines between each sentence? It makes his arguments unbearable to read.
#3
Added:
medicen
#2
Added:
--> @crossed
I think con has this one - medicen isn’t real
#1
#2
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Winner 1 point
Reason:
Non sequitur + Argument from ignorance fallacies by Pro
#1
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Winner 1 point
Reason:
As con pointed out in round 2, pro used a formal fallacy or non sequitur. This is, perhaps, the biggest mistake to make in a debating argument. Assuming their premises are true, those premises make no mention or reason for a god to even exist, so to come to the conclusion a god is responsible for such plant life simply doesn't follow the premises. Pro never again offers premises which include evidence of such a god, or evidence that a god had to create such herbs and plant-life. They then use informal fallacies, such as the bare assertion fallacy as con pointed out, but also uses the appeal to ignorance in round 2, where they ask "how could evolution create a plant like a turmeric with properties that can reverse damage done by schizophrenic medication. The answer is it can not. This would require great intelligence." It fits this fallacy to a tee, given it's about arguing that someone hasn't proved something, therefore the opposite is true. Though con is indicating how it's possible for evolution to have done this even, so in a way it's worse since pro seems to be dismissing con's evidence for evolution creating these plants. Pro accepted the burden of proof in the description. Their arguments, on their own, have proven to be fallacious. Due to BOP rules, con didn't' even technically need to provide evidence to a contrary position, and merely rebut what the opponent had said, but they did provide evidence to a contrary position. Con is a clear winner here for the debate. No matter what evidences pro shows for their premises, it didn't matter given the premises do not even support the conclusion to begin with.