(Pro) Atheistic evolution vs Christian creationism (con)

R2 ArgumentsThe Round one definitions seem satisfactory. On one side we have the rational atheistic evolution. Which promotes via empirical evidence how we came to be through a series of natural processes. Our universe came from another universe, the multi-verse theory, then a big bang occurred, the big bang theory, the Earth gradually formed via rotations, the theory of gravity.Next, the first lifeforms emerged abiogenesis, theory of abiogenesis. Which then evolved into more and more complex lifeforms eventually evolving homo sapiens. This is Darwin's theory of evolution. This is all rational and backed up by empirical evidence, although we cannot replicate such events like the big bang, we can use computer models. Finally, a scientific hypothesis is considered true, until proven false. All these above theories are therefore considered true, until proven false. This is the nature of science. On the other side, we have Christian creationism, a faith based approach which relies solely upon Christian religious doctrine. Doctrine that claims God is good, geocentric, flat, young Earth. Filled with many unrepeatable and unobservable events like a man walking on water, turning water into wine, rising from the dead, Jonah surviving three days and nights within the belly of a great fish, Noah surviving a year with a very large boat built by amateurs with lots of animals on board.Not only that, but a character who claims to be the one and only benevolent God who breaks his own rules and performs many immoral deeds. The worst in my opinion is eternal damnation, punishing finite crimes with infinite punishment. There is many others including promoting slavery. ""20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he [is] his money." [2]"“Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;” " [3]"The genocides of the Old Testament. [4] This includes the drowning of almost every human and animal on the Earth. The incest within the Bible. [5][6]If this wasn't enough the Bible has plenty of contradictions and translations. [7][8]How can we trust this source that has been translated so many times and contains so many contradictions? That promotes immoral behavior and impossible events. A character who breaks his own rules. That promotes ideas that are scientifically garbage, pseudoscience. The answer is we can't.I have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that literal Christian creationism is false. That the Earth cannot be flat, because it is spherical in shape. The theory of gravity wouldn't allow for a flat Earth. The rotations would smooth out the Earth into a sphere. That's why all the other planets are spherical in shape. There are many photographs of Earth. [9]The Earth is about 4.5 billion years old. We can tell this due to radioactive decay dating techniques. [10]"Age of moon rocks 4.5 billion19Age of meteorites 4.5 billion24Accumulation of space dust on the moon (at the measured rate of about 2 nanograms per square centimeter per year) 4.5 billion25Age of earth rocks 4.2 billion17Relaxation times of star clusters 4 billion26Erosion on Mercury Mars, and Moon 4 billion27Length of days of coral fossils 370 million28" [10]There are galaxies far away that require 13.3 billions of light years to travel. The universe must be at least 13.3 billion years old. [11]Then, there is the enormous amount of fossil evidence. [12] In sharp contrast my opponent stands by a series of books that claims that God sent two female bears to kill 42 children. That is both bizarre and immoral. "Elisha Mocked23Then he went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up by the way, young lads came out from the city and mocked him and said to him, "Go up, you baldhead; go up, you baldhead!" 24When he looked behind him and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two female bears came out of the woods and tore up forty-two lads of their number. 25He went from there to Mount Carmel, and from there he returned to Samaria.…" [13]Finally, I will back up evolution to head off my opponent's most common approaches. Is evolution testable and observable? Yes, evolution can be observed via natural selection. [14] Evolution can also be observed in the lab. The most notable is drug resistant pathogens becoming dominant via natural selection.[15] Evolution can be tested "With respect to the fossil record, evolutionary hypotheses are routinely tested as new fossil data are collected and matching that data against hypotheses about evolutionary relationships." [16]"But decades ago, theorists also proposed that a new species could evolve without any such changes, but instead simply as a result of large DNA strands' moving from one chromosome to another within a genome, a change known as a chromosomal rearrangement.While the theory sounded promising, since such rearrangements can be quite common, it eventually waned in popularity, in part because scientists had no way of testing it.Now in a slick feat of molecular maneuvering, a team of researchers has reorganized huge portions of one yeast species' chromosomes, rendering its chromosomal map identical to that of a closely related species, just as it was once, in the distant past. " [16]There is multiple ways to observe and test evolution both in the field and in the laboratory. I look forward to your response, thank you for debating. Sources.2. http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...3. http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...4. http://skepticsannotatedbible.com...5. http://listverse.com...6. http://www.holybooks.info...7. https://www.britannica.com...8. http://infidels.org...9. https://duckduckgo.com...10. http://godandscience.org...11. http://www.space.com...12. http://atheism.about.com...13. http://biblehub.com...14. http://atheism.about.com...15. http://listverse.com...16. http://www2.ljworld.com...