life is created intelligently
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 2 votes and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 5,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
No information
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Through the study and analysis of a system’s components, a design theorist is able to determine whether various natural structures are the product of chance, natural law, intelligent design, or some combination thereof. Such research is conducted by observing the types of information produced when intelligent agents act. Scientists then seek to find objects which have those same types of informational properties which we commonly know come from intelligence. Intelligent design has applied these scientific methods to detect design in irreducibly complex biological structures, the complex and specified information content in DNA, the life-sustaining physical architecture of the universe, and the geologically rapid origin of biological diversity in the fossil record during the Cambrian explosion approximately 530 million years ago.
The theory of intelligent design simply says that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
secret information that is collected, for example about a foreign country, especially one that is an enemy; the people that collect this information
Intellect is the ability to understand or deal with ideas and information.
Having or showing intelligence, especially of a high level.
showing intelligence, or able to learn and understand things easily
the creator of the predators gave these animals big sharp teeth
the creator of the mountain goat gave the goat special feet that make it easier to mountain climb.
The Austrian monk Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) was the first person to describe how traits are inherited from generation to generation. He studied how pea plants inherited traits such as color and smoothness, and discovered that traits are inherited from parents in certain patterns.
Darwin's concept of natural selection was based on several key observations:
- Traits are often heritable. In living organisms, many characteristics are inherited, or passed from parent to offspring. (Darwin knew this was the case, even though he did not know that traits were inherited via genes.)
- More offspring are produced than can survive. Organisms are capable of producing more offspring than their environments can support. Thus, there is competition for limited resources in each generation.
- Offspring vary in their heritable traits. The offspring in any generation will be slightly different from one another in their traits (color, size, shape, etc.), and many of these features will be heritable.
Pro makes a typical argument from design - that properties of life seem to imply they were designed. What I needed to see from con here is a clear argument or explanation as to how some of these properties could have originated without design, or an argument about why design cannot be implies
The most relevant part of cons arguments (ignoring pros opening semantic argument), was basically attempting to claim that pro can’t just point to traits and say that they were designed. While I am sympathetic - pros arguments is effectively a list of astonishingly complex organisms that Appear well suited to their environment is intuitive.
Fortunately, con does just enough in the remainder of the rounds, with his appeal to Darwinian selection to provide me a counter example of why these examples may not be due to design. While this explanation was minimal, it was sufficient to overturn the intuitive part of pros argument.
As a result, arguments to con.
All other points tied (equal forfeits)
Mehhhhhhhhh
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Wrick-It-Ralph // Mod action: Not Removed
>Points Awarded: Tied.
>Reason for Mod Action: Votes which do not award points are not subject to review because no standard exists in the COC against by which they can be removed.
************************************************************************
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: K_Michael // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 7 points to Con
>Reason for Decision: "mash potatoes are gross" isn't a debate. It could have been put in the comments. R2 was effectively forfeited/waived by Pro. Combined with R3 forfeit, 2/3 forfeits; conduct to Con.
Pro mostly named traits and characteristics of animals that suited their environments, coupled with a claim that a being had to have intelligently created those animals with their features. His claim is unfounded, and all traits, as far as I could tell, had equal claims to natural selection. BoP requires a claim with more basis than an opposite claim. Even if there is a basis, Pro needs to show them. Argument to Con.
Pro's sources described animal characteristics, not corroborated claims. Con's sources showed relevant theories and definitions. Sources to Con.
Pro leaves off proper capitalizations and punctuation.
>Reason for Mod Action: The voter fails to sufficiently justify awarding sources and S/G points. To award sources, the voter must (1) explain how the sources impacted the debate, (2) analyze at least one source specifically, and (3) compare each debaters' source and use of them. The voter only performs the third task. To award S/G, the voter must (1) give specific examples of S/G errors, (2) explain how these errors were excessive, and (3) compare each debater's S/G. The voter does none of these tasks. Argument points were borderline, which means we default to treating them as sufficient. Conduct points were sufficient.
************************************************************************
This is not a full forfeit.
Could I have a clarification please!:
“A full-forfeit debate is defined as a debate that has no argument presented by one side following the opening round, resulting in all subsequent rounds being forfeited”
In this debate no argument was presented, but not all subsequent rounds were forfeited. Would this qualify as a full forfeit?
yes lets do this again
https://www.debateart.com/debates/794
We can rematch if you'd like. I'd prefer more than 5,000 characters if we are to properly battle.
i am on schools computers
my internet broke