Darwin's theory of evolution & creationism are mutually exclusive.

The methodology I use is probably most appealing to those who share my worldview as a Christian. In this round, I'll be using reason and evidence in order to show one particular case in which creationism and the theory of evolution are undeniably compatible. Before I begin, I'd like to take an opportunity to respond to my opponent's statements. Section I is not an argument. My opponent's section II, I grant full concession. I'm in agreement that the quotations provided are opinion. I provided these references to support my claim that "not all creationists disbelieve in natural selection. " I'm assuming that my opponent would likewise grant concession on this claim, since he didn't address it. I was just looking to establish that my position was neither unique nor unusual, especially among the experts in their field. Section III, my opponent suggests that my round one opening "delves into the origin of life. " I don't actually recall doing so, and I agree with my opponent that the separate debate of "abiogensis" (sic) doesn't really belong in this discussion given the definitions provided in the opener. I suppose my opponent may be referring to my statement, "Darwin's theory doesn't suggest what the ultimate origin of life on earth may be. " We can replace "life on earth" with "the universe" to make its comparison to creationism clearer and more relevant. In Section IV, I reject the notion that using different approaches to finding conclusions necessitates mutual exclusion. If one wanted to discover the truth regarding properly programming a VCR, for example, one could speak directly to a knowledgeable person, read the instruction manual, use trial-and-error, or watch a "how-to" video on YouTube. It is feasible that one can come to the same conclusion using any of these four methods, and could also use a combination of them without ever encountering a contradiction. Most of the presentation put forth in Section V only applies to the YEC, and even then is only valid if one is able to somehow disprove what I feel is my most compelling religious argument, summarized in my opener as number 4. At no point do I see this argument addressed. The few remarks that don't only apply to YEC, only apply to Christianity. The case I will be making below renders moot the entire section my opponent provides, as it details a specific type of creationist that is neither a YEC nor a Christian. As for Section VII, since I have addressed every section my opponent presented, and invalidated each of them as far as the resolution is concerned (or will after the case below). The conclusions are also invalidated. The Case of the DeistWhat is a deist? [6] In summary, a deist is anyone who believes in a deity that created our universe based entirely on reason and evidence. A deist, therefore, rejects divine revelation as it appears in any holy texts, because that revelation would then be heresay when repeated from one individual to the next. Is a deist a creationist? The first source provided by my opponent states, "At a broad level, a Creationist is someone who believes in a god who is absolute creator of heaven and earth, out of nothing, by an act of free will. " Further descriptions in the same paragraph are qualified as "generally," and at no point in my opponent's response was my previous summarized agreement with this definition challenged. Some deists also believe in heaven, and that the same God created it. Therefore, those deists are necessarily creationist by my opponent's own standard. Why are we discussing deists here? Because it provides an opportunity to isolate the discussion from all the extraneous beliefs concerned by matters of faith. Since deists do not believe the texts written by man to be truth, we can completely ignore my opponent's reference to Jonah and the whale, Moses and the Red Sea, Jesus, 1 day equaling millions of days, etc. Some deists believe that God created all things at the onset of the universe and then hasn't intervened since. Those deists believe that God's only interaction with our universe was to cause the big bang 13.7 billion years ago [7]. The series of events following the big bang, according to those deists, is adequately explained by science. Life on earth did not occur until about 3.8 billion years ago [8]. Evolution only deals with explaining how living organisms change over time. So if this deist's worldview is correct. there is no part of it that conflicts with the theory of evolution. And if the theory of evolution is correct, there is no part of it that conflicts with deism, one form of creationism. No conflict can exist when there ae 9.9 billion years between them. Creationism and evolution coexist in this scenario, and nobody has to make an "unhappy compromise. "Conclusion:I have invalidated the arguments my opponent presented, and I have presented evidence of a creationist philosophy, deism, whose beliefs are irrefutably compatible with Darwin's theory of evolution. The resolution, "Darwin's theory of evolution & creationism are mutually exclusive" is falsified, and con is victorious. I now yield to pro, who is given the final word, as I intend to offer nothing further of substance in round 3 to facilitate equal time. [6] . http://www.deism.com...[7] . http://www.big-bang-theory.com...[8] . http://www.bbc.co.uk...