Only four days to go. I am 7-1 down. I feel that is a little harsh. You may disagree. But can we have some votes on this please. Honest votes too. If you genuinely disagree with me that is fine.
My over-all argument is apparent in my very first sentence, when i state that Genesis is mostly based on Mesopotamian mythology, and Mesopotamian mythology, which genesis is built on, is not a blue-print for evolution. And i provided examples of the mythology Genesis creation myth was b uilt upon, such as "godess Mami".
This right there in my opinion pretty much removes Genesis being compatible with modern science, which is what Charles Darwin was supporting.
Even Charles Darwins personal beliefs are not important really. The Scientific thesis he is proposing does not co-cooperate with Genesis.
Also for those that think i over used wikipedia. I only use wikipedia as a foundation to build an argument upon. I leave it to my opponent as to whether he accepts the information or wishes to challenge. If he challenges, i will then find another source. Encyclopedia Britanicca most likely. but he never made this challenge. Therefore i stuck with wikipedia.
I also admit i focus more on facts and information, than grammar. And i make a lot of slight errors regards to typos et cetera. I type very fast and should learn patience.
Those that think humour is not a good thing for a formal debate also might wish to include that as a conduct violation, as i always seek to bring a little humour in to everything, no matter how formal, and i did make an attempt to bring humour in to this debate. My opponent was a little scathing of this.
But i personally fail to see how my main two objectives, described above, about Mesopotanian mythology and modern day science being two different things were ever refuted. Modern day science is not based upon mythology, and i made it perfectly clear in my argument, that this was my main argument.
Please can we have some votes.
If you do not agree with me. I shall accept that.