Atheism Evolution vs Creation by God

First, the videosThe Red Sea videos are just videos of what you've been saying. I've already explained how it's possible for garbage and debris to be pulled by the current across the sea floor.Same goes for Mount Sinai. A rock was found that was mentioned in the Bible. This does not prove anything. Just because a place was mentioned in the Bible doesn't mean creationism is 100% true.The "human" hands found are widely accepted throughout the scientific community to be turtle hands [1]. And the trees? Erosion happens. Volcanic eruptions, other normal Earthly events can cause rocks to crumble while the tree is fossilized through the layers. There are many reasonable explanations as to why or how trees can be buried through different layers of the geologic column, like this site explains [2].So basically, the videos are just extended versions of your arguments.Now back to the debateThe reason I brought up the "sources" category is because it's extremely helpful in a debate to cite where you get your information, instead of making claims then telling me to do my own homework. I wish this was a simple "who has the better argument" type of debate, but it isn't. Claims like these require evidence, and we can't provide evidence without at least citing websites that have members who do extensive research and contains documentation on the subject at hand. I appreciate the sites, they do help your argument, as they do seem credible and do give you grounds, instead of making a claim that something says something without anything else agreeing with you, so thanks.I actually did read the part about contradictions before I even saw you asked me to, however I fail to see the relevance of the misconceptions between Edom and Aram in regards to our debate, other than just being consistent.The reason I "complained" about sarcasm is that I just find it kind of annoying when someone who I (think) am having a friendly debate with decides to "sarcastically" belittle my intelligence and insinuate that I don't have a brain."Miracles"Here's that rock - http://tinypic.com...The water flows up to a certain point, and there is erosion. When we scooped water out, it would rise back up. No, this isn't a "geyser," but it's a natural (yet strange) phenomenon that happens. The main thing that I like about this comparison is your "miracle" happened through a rock, and in my situation, there is water coming out of this rock too.Just because something is strange does not mean it is evidence of creation by God, considering we have evidence of geysers around the world, and I explained how geysers work, and water is known to be below the desert floor, so the chance that it can happen here isn't incredibly low, and definitely not a miracle.I kind of got confused at your last few statements there. Carbon dating isn't perfect, you're correct, however there are other methods of studying the age of inorganic matter [3]. A boat in a mountain can give the impression there was a large flood, sure, but it doesn't prove anything, considering there are many other ideas and theories that are yet to be disproved.Red SeaIf someone were to mention ancient computers or Nazi silver, transporting them by ships wouldn't come to mind. ...Does this also mean you're ruling out the possibility that chariots or their parts were not transported by ships?"No good scientific explanation."-The tides rushing in and out due to the melting polar ice caps caused the line of people to get swept out and drown?-The ground was elevated in several spots, and the people thought they could survive on the higher ground but the water came in and eventually surrounded them all?-The water went out due to tidal surges before a tsunami, and the water rushed back in and killed them all?*This is all assuming you're right, and it was actually dry land that everyone walked along*-Maybe they all started going when the tide was out, or a tidal surge had pulled the water out to sea, and it rushed back so quickly that they didn't have time to get back to land, and their chariots got swept to sea?There's plenty of scientific theories relating to old technology at the bottom of the sea.How'd the chariots get in the water in the first place? Maybe someone threw faulty chariots in there? That's a pretty reasonable explanation right there.Your "raised ocean floor" point kind of validates my theory that the people sought refuge on top higher ground when the water started filling back up.Quantum theoriesI'm not using quantum mathematics to validate the theory of evolution. The reason I brought up anything on the quantum level in the first place is because you claimed nothing can be created nor destroyed, therefore the universe could not have just "came to be." So I explained how quantum fluctuations work to show there is a very good chance (backed with video proof) that matter actuallycan come into existence without an external force.So I'm not supporting my evolution theory with my quantum fluctuations theory. I'm disputing your claim (something you asked me to do in your first round) about matter not being able to come into existence, as you said - "I only require a rebuttal for every argument." So I gave you my rebuttal, and you're saying "no, it's just a theory." ...Yeah and so is practically everything in existence, not a whole lot of scientific ideas are regarded as absolute fact, and certainly no religious theories are considered fact. Even evolution is not 100% fact, however there are many pieces of evidence that support the theory of evolution.NothingWhat's funny is your misunderstanding of the phrase "nothing doesn't exist." Everywhere is something. Even dark matter has been shown to most likely not even exist, and is replaced with actual matter, or energy. Whenever you say "nothing," I know you're saying the lack of anything, however as I showed you much earlier in the debate, there's a pretty solid argument against the fact that there actually is "nothing" in the Universe. Instead of the empty space, there is energy, if no matter exists. You're asserting there was one point in time (or space) that nothing existed. Given our current understandings of what "nothing" is, it can be argued that where someone thinks there was "nothing," something actually was there, and it was most likely energy, which can create matter, as shown by my quantum fluctuation example.EvolutionYou seem to fail to grasp the concept of evolution completely. Since I've taken care of everything else already, I've got plenty of space to explain evolution and how it works and the evidence we have to support the theory. Please keep in mind when someone is talking about evolution, they're most likely referring to the mutations and change in a species of animal, and the idea that all life (or animate life) came from the same type of cells at a time. For example, through the right atmosphere and environment along with the combination of water and breathable air, organic molecules started mutating and growing, and ended up replicating themselves (most likely) in an African body of water. Simple adaptations to the environment (considering the molecules are organic, they have the ability to do that) caused certain things to happen; cell membranes formed, different molecules such as proteins being responsible for metabolic functions, or DNA responsible for transmitting information throughout the cell, etc. This [4] explains everything I went over in greater detail, with diagrams. You ask for a common ancestor, well we're not too certain. However it is quite possible that life originated around an air vent at the bottom of an ocean or sea or body of water [5]. Please feel free to take a look through the rest of the pages in the links I provided, as they go into great detail explaining how life can form through chemical compounds and how it can adapt to it's environment and evolve."Kind to Kind"I hear way too many creationists say this. This does not happen. This is not evolution. This is nothing. This is your misinterpretation of what evolution is. Evolution is the changing and adaptation of a species and bacteria and any living thing. Evolution is not a dog turning into a lion overnight. It is not a fly turning into a monkey. The idea that we all share a common ancestor has nothing to do with different species, who share different DNA, "evolving" into a completely different species. You even agreed that evolution exists on a "small scale," I'm assuming you mean microscopic, but even if you did, how can you rule out the possibility of evolution existing within larger animals if it exists in small animals? Because our idea that it takes hundreds of thousands of years for animals to evolve into what they are today doesn't fit with your "11,000 year old Earth" idea?Microevolution [6] is adapting to an environment. Macroevolution [7] is studied through fossils, geology, and the change or current state of other living organisms. If you can accept that different animals have adapted to their environment, I don't see why you can't accept that they've continuously adapted and changed over millions and millions of years.Also, when you say "kind," I think you mean "species" [8]. Darwin can help explain evolution to you [9].Glad we finally got the evolution argument out of the way!Thanks, I won't bring up new arguments next round, I'll just counter yours.[1] http://paleo.cc...[2] http://www.proof-of-evolution.com...[3] http://www.scientificamerican.com...[4] http://evolution.berkeley.edu...[5] http://evolution.berkeley.edu...[6] http://evolution.berkeley.edu...[7] http://evolution.berkeley.edu...[8] http://evolution.berkeley.edu...[9] http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com...