Instigator / Pro
4
1702
rating
77
debates
70.13%
won
Topic
#2106

Adam & Eve contained the entire human genome

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
2
0
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...

Death23
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
15,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
5
1553
rating
24
debates
56.25%
won
Description

Resolved: Adam & Eve contained the entire expression of the human genome. By their direct contribution of male and female gametes, producing a human zygote with each pregnancy, their individual human DNA, along with the immediate potential in their first generation of offspring, and all generations following, to have the genome begin mutation to create the wide distribution of random gene selection resulting in the variety of human physical traits we see today. Not only are we all genetically related, we all contain these variant traits of hair, eye, and skin color, and physical structural differences within each sex. With dominant and recessive gene selection, each generation of children are a genetic imprint of their parents, while expressing unique combination of characteristics within each child, but for early duplication of the zygote resulting in identical twins, triplets, etc.

In this debate, I, as Pro, make no allusion to religion, God, or the Bible, other than the latter as being the only germane source of knowledge regarding the characters of Adam & Eve. This debate assumes the claim in the full description that Adam & Eve represent the first parents of the entire human family, i.e., Homo sapiens. The debate will not have opposing argument on this matter. Therefore, any DART member wishing to take the Con position of the proposition should agree to this stipulation of human parentage. The argument turns only on the proposition that other factors than a full set of human characteristics, by full genetic content, plus mutation, determined the variety of human physical expression we witness today.

Definitions:
Adam & Eve: The first male and female examples of the species, Homo sapiens

Genome: the entire set of human genes

Gamete: the mature human male and female germ cells [sperm and ova, respectively]

Debate protocol: 4 total rounds; 8 arguments

Rounds 1 – 3: Argument/Rebuttal/Defense

Round 4: No new argument. Rebuttal/defense/conclusion

Resolution: "the entire expression of the human genome" "the variety of human physical traits we see today" "the variety of human physical expression we witness today"

"The human genome" refers to the human genome as it exists TODAY. It does not refer to the human genome the first time it "was already extant." REPEAT: "traits we see TODAY" "we witness TODAY" - In case you didn't miss it - TODAY TODAY TODAY TODAY TODAY TODAY TODAY - Key words - "TODAY" - This does NOT mean when the first point in time when it "was already extent." That is NOT what it says in the description. That is NOT what the debate description means.

You continue to lie.

Now that this debate is over and done, I will comment on the feature I argued in my r2, I.a.3, and summarized/added to in my r4, I.a.4: "the debate proposal indicated that Adam and Eve were the first mating pair of H. sapiens. Therefore, the human genome, unfettered by an inferior genome of Neanderthals, was already extant. What happened to it after interbreeding with Neanderthals is whatever happened in terms of change to the genome, but this does not affect the proposal of the debate. It is a matter of simple logic. If ‘A’ is the human genome as expressed by Adam + Eve first generation offspring, and ‘B’ is ‘A100,000’ [an ‘A’ descendant] + Neanderthal, it follows that A ≠ B." Our singular voter did not see this.

This clearly stipulates the condition Con rebutted [poorly in my estimation], and as stated in the proposal, that "Adam & Eve contained the entire human genome" and I later presented in argument that the added mutating effect of interbreeding with Neanderthals downgraded the complete human genome. Started virtually perfect, and devolved. Devolution is a part of science, isn't it?

-->
@fauxlaw

Obviously I was referring to the outcome of his vote. You're going to lose anyway because you were wrong. You bet you'll get attitude when you start making threats. Blocked.

-->
@Death23

I lost? There are seven days, plus, left in voting. You don't win, and neither do I until the voting period is concluded. Being cocky usually ends with premature efactulation.

You don't get it. My concern is not how K_M voted; it's your post #17, and attitude since that is objectionable. That's entirely on you, my friend. Argue for your limitations; they're yours.

-->
@fauxlaw

He didn't vote that way. Even if he did it wouldn't be a biased vote on arguments. Even if there was vote rigging, the only thing the mods would do is remove the vote because it's not a CoC violation. You're just mad because you lost.

-->
@Death23

Did I claim his vote was biased? No, I said you encouraged a biased vote by suggesting how to vote. Get it?

-->
@fauxlaw

Why don't you go whine to the mods.

-->
@fauxlaw

There is no evidence that his vote was biased.

-->
@Death23

I did not post lightly. I may be, or may not be quoting a mod. You don't know, do you? Can't adequately argue what you don't know. As I said, watch it.

Voting policy: "Vote rigging is when someone solicits deliberately biased votes in order to rig the outcome of a vote. Votes stemming from vote rigging will be removed. It is not vote rigging to ask for someone to cast a fair vote."

Your post #17: "The mod made no mention of any problem with your arguments points. Perhaps you could re-vote it awarding argument points only." Looks like solicitation and bias, by suggesting K_M to vote again, and to ignore a four-point voting system to concentrate just on argument. He can, and should make those decision on his own without your suggestion. That's not a "fair vote." Or, would you like my to report it?

-->
@fauxlaw

Not even close. Soliciting votes is fine. His vote was not biased. I know the policy, and you know that there was no policy violation. I will continue to do as I please.

-->
@Death23

Your encouragement to K_Michael to vote again, even with suggestion how to vote, borders on vote rigging. Watch it.

-->
@K_Michael

The mod made no mention of any problem with your arguments points. Perhaps you could re-vote it awarding argument points only.

-->
@K_Michael

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: K_Michael // Mod action: [Removed]

>Points Awarded: 3 Con, 2 Pro

>Reason for Decision:
The argument "what manipulation of the genome may have occurred after 50,000 years ago is not in the scope of this debate" is blatantly false, as Con points out. The "entire human genome," includes all examples of the species, even those after 50,000 years ago, by definition. Since Pro concedes the existence of interspecies breeding, he by extension conceded the point.
Arguments to Pro.
Con only used a single Wikipedia article as a cited source. Pro not only uses more official sources, especially https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK22110/, which is a government organization, but also has more sources.
>Reason for Mod Action: The voter fails to sufficiently explain a) how the sources strengthened or weakened the arguments presented and b) how the sources used impacted the debate. Both of these are required under the Voting Policy. I'm sorry for any inconvenience.
************************************************************************

-->
@fauxlaw

You have the burden of proof. If you fail even one argument, you lose.

-->
@K_Michael

I completely disagree with your assessment of my argument. You have ignored my R1, arguments III.a through III.a.4. Consider them in light of your vote. You're supposed review all arguments.

-->
@Death23
@fauxlaw

that was quickly argued. nice.

-->
@User_2006

In any event a simple way to satisfy that would be to merely present Pro's theory + genetic admixture. It would be a "better theory" because it is the same in all respects except that it accounts for genetic admixture. This does not seem like a lot of work.

-->
@User_2006

I see. I did not read that before starting this debate. That would be a deviation from the standard burdens within the community and should have been disclosed within the debate description. It is unfair to hold a contender to something like that unless he consents to it.

-->
@Death23

---> #7

-->
@User_2006

That is not my understanding of Con's burden in debates. My understanding is that Con's burden is to show that the resolution is not true and does not extend beyond that. If you have anything which is supportive of your position I will consider it and it would be appreciated.

-->
@Death23

You have to prove a resolution too. You have to prove HOW humans originated aside from being from adam and eve, not just prove that your opponent is wrong.

Guys, the argument by Con is to present a better theory than I propose of a single set of parents, their combined genome, and mutation.

-->
@Jeff_Goldblum

The description says all you need to argue about. Adam and Even originated the human genome, along with the potential for mutation [a possible outside influence] of that genome over generations, beginning with Gen 1. Isn't that all in the description?

-->
@User_2006

Don't bother to read the description, which negates your attempts at BoP for #s 1, 2, 3, 4 is a given, and 5 is superfluous. You must accept some assumptions in this debate. I am not arguing any other matter relative to who or what started Homo sapiens. For argument's sake only, we're calling them Adam and Eve. Are you more comfortable with Jack and Jill? IT DOES NOT MATTER. Get over your details and read the description. THAT is the total scope of the debate, regardless of what biology theorizes. I have defined what is needed to be supported by argument, whether biologically accurate, or not. Who can sell the best theory?

-->
@fauxlaw

So is the central question of the debate whether Adam and Eve produced the human genome as it exists today without any outside contribution?

-->
@RationalMadman

I've heard this one before. As I said in description: Within the scope of the debate, Adam & Eve are accepted as first parents. and God is irrelevant.

-->
@fauxlaw

You have to prove:
1. 2 humans originated humanity, instead of millions of apes.
2. There are 2 humans, and only 2 humans at the beginning
3. God exists and created them
4. They are called Adam and Eve.
5. Because of 1 and 2, thus some theories of the current anthropology and biology that are proven true does not work.

-->
@fauxlaw

Adam and Eve were a metaphor. Adam was mankind and Eve was God. I will explain more if you care about my theory.