Evolution vs Creationism

Rebuttal #1 == Creationism is implausible == My opponent claims that "There are a number of things that prove the Bible is not inerrant and that it contains falsities". Yet, he fails to show any evidence to back up his claims. This is more of a personal opinion, you say this because you personally agree with evolution over creationism. Let's take evolution for example. There are my people who disapprove and don't believe in Evolution because it's just another thought of how we, our world and mammals have evolved. So, since you claimed the bible is false, and everything in it, there are many things that prove Evolution to be wrong. Here is a detailed example about eggs and sperms. [1] Human Egg and Sperm Proves Evolution is Wrong The evolutionist ignores the problem surrounding the human female egg and the male sperm in the evolutionary theory. The female egg contains the X-chromosome and the male sperm contains either an X-chromosome for the reproduction of a male or a Y-chromosome for the reproduction of a female. The female eggs all develop within the ovaries while she is a baby (fetus) within her mother's womb. Evolutionists claim environmental factors cause small changes in the offspring in the evolutionary chain. However, the environmental experience of the female cannot change the chromosomes within her eggs and cannot have any effect upon her offspring. Her body cannot go into the eggs contained within her ovaries at her birth to make an intelligent change. Females cannot be a part of the evolutionary theory for these reasons. Rebuttal #2 The Bible is not inerrantCreationism relies on a key assumption: that every word of the Bible is absolute fact. There are a number of things that prove the Bible is not inerrant and that it contains falsities. If I prove a falsity in the Bible, I prove the entire basis for Creationism is a faulty assumption. There has been many prophecies that prove the bible to be correct. We can look around today, and see that all of these things that have been prophesized are true. Roundness of the earth (Isaiah 40:22)Almost infinite extent of the sidereal universe (Isaiah 55:9)Law of conservation of mass and energy (II Peter 3:7)Hydrologic cycle (Ecclesiastes 1:7)Vast number of stars (Jeremiah 33:22)Now, we know from teachings of History and Evolution that, Pythagoras was the first to predict that the earth was round. Pythagoras was born in 571 B.C and died at the age of 75. The book if Isaiah, which prophesized the roundness of the earth was written in 150 100 BCE. [3] "The oldest surviving manuscripts of Isaiah are two scrolls found among the Dead Sea Scrolls; dating from about 150 to 100 BCE, they are substantially identical with the Masoretic version which forms the basis of most modern English-language versions of the book. (a) the Earth is not 6000 years old Scientist seem to believe that the earth is some billions of years old, proved by their dating method. But, another method they use "Radio-active" dating methods. But, scientist also use " Carbon-14 dating methods. Radiocarbon in Diamonds [4] Far from proving evolution, carbon-14 dating actually provides some of the strongest evidence for creation and a young earth. Radiocarbon (carbon-14) cannot remain naturally in substances for millions of years because it decays relatively rapidly. For this reason, it can only be used to obtain “ages” in the range of tens of thousands of years. As shown, dating methods confuse with how old the earth actually is. Radioactive dating isn't reliable either. [5] 'Radioactive isotopes are unstable and will decay into more stable isotopes of other elements. One common radiometric dating method is the Uranium-Lead method. This involves uranium isotopes with an atomic mass of 238. This is the most common form of uranium. It decays by a 14-step process into lead-206, which is stable. Each step involves the elimination of either an alpha or a beta particle. Therefore the process is: Each individual atom has a chance of decaying by this process. If you were able to examine just one atom, you would not know whether or not it would decay. The chance of it decaying is not definite, by human standards, and is similar to the chance of rolling a particular number on a dice. Although we cannot determine what will happen to an individual atom, we can determine what will happen to a few million atoms....What happens statistically is that half of the available atoms will have decayed in a given period, specific to each radioactive species, called the half-life. For example, if element Aa had a half-life of 1 day and we had 1,000 lbs. of it on Monday, then we would have 500 lbs. on Tuesday, 250 lbs. (half of 500) on Wednesday and 125 lbs. on Thursday.....The radioactive decay process above can be seen to produce 8 alpha-particles for each one atom of U-238. Each Ã"Â±-particle could gain new electrons and become an atom of helium. The rate of diffusion of helium from a zircon crustal can be measured. It turns out that this rate of diffusion of helium is compatible with the crystals being about 5,000 years old, not 1.5 billion years old. Obviously, we can't depend on Radioactive dating to determine how old our Earth actually is. We have Carbon, used by scientist that shows us we have a young Earth, then we have Radioactive dating which shows us we have an old Earth. Seems like science has a major conflict. (b) Mythical creatures Many creatures described in the bible were very unusual and bizarre. [5] There are certainly many strange creatures mentioned in the Bible. Some descriptions are symbolic and are simply meant to represent certain nations, people, or ideas in prophetic visions; these creatures were never intended to be taken literally. Other passages are indeed describing a real beast, although the names provided by translators were sometimes taken from mythology. The King James Version, translated in 1611, contains several mentions of mythological creatures, including the unicorn, the dragon, and the fearsome cockatrice.Now, this doesn't mean that all of these animals talked about in the bible were fake. [6] UnicornsHebrew word re'em, signifies a horned animal similar to the aurochs, a now-extinct ancestor of today’s domestic cattle. For some unknown reason, the translators of the KJV chose to substitute “unicorn” for the name of this horned animal each time it occurred: e.g., Deuteronomy 33:17; Psalm 22:21; and Isaiah 34:7. The Bible, in its original languages, never actually mentions unicorns.CockatricesThe cockatrice is a legendary monster, half-rooster and half-snake, with the ability to turn people to stone at a glance. It may not be so well known as other mythological beings today, but, at the time the KJV translation was made, the cockatrice was a pervasive myth in Britain. The word cockatrice was used to translate the Hebrew tsepha`, which properly means “poisonous serpent or viper,” in four of its five occurrences: Isaiah 11:8; 14:29; 59:5; and Jeremiah 8:17. John Wycliffe used cockatrice in his 1382 Bible translation, and the KJV translators retained the term. How can we believe this is not, of the bible? (c) Basic physicsYet, as mentioned in the begging of my argument, the prediction of the roundness of earth was written in the book if Isaiah, chapter 40, verse 22, which is accurate today. (Sadly, I'm running out of characters, it will not give me enough characters to write my argument. So I shall write my argument in the next round since Pro didnt state any rules!) Sources: [1] http://www.conspiracyclub.co... [2] http://www.christiananswers.net... [3] http://en.wikiquote.org... [4] https://answersingenesis.org... [5] http://www.gotquestions.org... [6] http://www.missiontoamerica.org...