Instigator / Pro
1
1491
rating
1
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#941

There was a prior, fundamental action, direction, and purpose in the creation of human beings.

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
0
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
0
1

After 1 vote and with 6 points ahead, the winner is...

Ramshutu
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
7
1764
rating
43
debates
94.19%
won
Description

I will be arguing that there was prior action in the creation of human beings. Con will be arguing against.The first round will constitute of accepting the challenge and clarifying your position. Second round will be for the main arguments. The third round will be for rebuttal and your final statement.

The only part that's grammatically wrong is to not have 'and' between 'prior' and 'fundamental' instead of the comma.

-->
@Barney

The resolution is written in completely correct English. It makes complete sense but people like you and Ramshutu struggle with comprehending that.

From my understanding, because this is philosophy, many of my arguments will stem from my personal understanding and common sense. Unless I am citing specific technical terms, statistics, etc., I will not be referencing to sources.

-->
@K_Michael

I will hopefully try to successfully answer your questions satisfactorily in this debate. I have given a introduction to some of my main arguments and in the upcoming arguments and rebuttals, maybe some of your questions and concerns can be answered. :)

-->
@Sporkicide

" In order for a being such as amoeba to move to a higher level, to adapt to the theory of evolution, while the amoeba engages in production, energy must be added, That energy is a plus, and the amoeba themselves cannot generate this plus power."
There's this thing called a metabolic process that allows organisms through various means to produce energy. Cyanobacteria use CO2 and sunlight. Amoebas, I believe, eat bacteria or something. Humans do this thing called eating.
And the amoeba isn't personally evolving like a pokemon. Tiny mutations and natural selection allow for a species to change over time, eventually into another species, though how the distinction is defined is unclear to me. Fossil records show no intermediaries that I know of. Sure, there's archaeopteryx displaying the evolution of birds from reptiles, but it doesn't demonstrate the intermediary between CLOSE species, like a common raven and a chihuahuan raven. At one point did a common raven or an ancestor lay an egg and hatch a chihuahuan raven?

-->
@Ramshutu

Last round can be for rebuttals (mainly) and if you wish arguments that you can still present. I also want to keep it as open as possible. :)

-->
@Sporkicide

I personally prefer flexible and open styles of debate, with rebuttals, summaries and no new arguments being presented in the final round; but if you want to have summary only in the final round, I will be happy with that too.

-->
@Ramshutu

I just want to clarify the last round to be mainly for closing and final statements.

I am new to this website so I am not sure how long it usually takes for someone to accept a challenge.

-->
@Sporkicide

Note: acceptance rounds are not needed in Dart, if you wanted to have three rounds of argument, I’m fine with that.

This is a philosophical debate.