azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

Frankly, no one has given good refutations....This is what I told to another person..."The smallest unit of life by biologists is considered a cell, which means that amino acids are not life."A distinctive characteristic of a living organism from dead organism or non-living thing, as specifically distinguished by the capacity to grow, metabolize, respond (to stimuli), adapt, and reproduce"http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Life"
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

the capacity to growNegative entropy... metabolizeNegative entropy... adaptNegative entropy...and reproduceNegative entropy...-You proved my point (and thus proved yourself wrong) brilliantly.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

You apparently did not see in my response to "SecturionX" or whatever his name is, I can't remember, where I said I concede on the point that the 2nd law does not apply to evolution in biological terms but to the universe's evolution...
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

It is actually scary to see the number of people saying that ti is false? Oh, so the fact a species changed over millions of years..? Preposterous. But some magic man in the sky made us out of 2 people, and suddenly there are 7 billion people, whom show no signs of thousands of generations of inbreeding..?! Oh yeah that must be it! By the way, i am being sarcastic, Evolution is the only possible way humans could have turned out the way we did! religious ideas are based on belief. Which is complete crap, if i believe that when i die i turn in to a tree.. People would call me mad! Some cosmic zombie man and his un-dead, but dead, floating in the sky son who is Jewish, but killed by Jews ruler of the world...? Yeah totally legit!!
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

Please tell me why you personally believe that and i will gladly debate you over it. But if you are just going to be sarcastic about the whole thing and not consider what i say, then i will not bother
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

There is far more proof and observations to support evolution.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

I am repeatedly surprised with the absolute paper thin weak arguments that creationists propose to refute evolution. They often cite pseudoscience, flawed logic/reasoning, or throw out science, logic, reason, and skeptical inquiry entirely.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

Could you summarize the refutations in the videos?
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

I watched it last night... but they include things like, "there is no such thing as a beneficial mutation," "no life has ever been created from non-life," "there is no geologic column," "the necessity for the Great Flood of the Bible and the Grand Canyon," etc. I think you might enjoy this! :)
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

"no life has ever been created from non-life,"You know what's funny, up until Louis Pasteur's experiments in the late 1800s, Christians believed that life came from non-life all the time (spontaneous generation). It would be even funnier if Christians argued against biogenesis when it was first proposed, like they did a lot of other scientific theories, but I couldn't find any real solid evidence of that on google, just one sentence in the article on biogenesis on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biogenesis
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

These are laws of nature and do not bound the supernatural. The reliability of proof is subjective.http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Law+of+biogenesishttp://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Law_of_biogenesishttp://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=4165 http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/God-natural-law Just type in "Law of Biogenesis" and you'll get tons of hits.But regardless of whether the Law of Biogenesis is the only thing we creationists have, it still does not refute the fact that no non-life has ever produced life.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

Define "life". Chances are numerous things are at least close to being alive from non-life. If we go with the biological definition:  Homeostasis: Regulation of the internal environment to maintain a constant state; for example, electrolyte concentration or sweating to reduce temperature. Organization: Being structurally composed of one or more cells, which are the basic units of life. Metabolism: Transformation of energy by converting chemicals and energy into cellular components (anabolism) and decomposing organic matter (catabolism). Living things require energy to maintain internal organization (homeostasis) and to produce the other phenomena associated with life. Growth: Maintenance of a higher rate of anabolism than catabolism. A growing organism increases in size in all of its parts, rather than simply accumulating matter. Adaptation: The ability to change over time in response to the environment. This ability is fundamental to the process of evolution and is determined by the organism's heredity, diet, and external factors. Response to stimuli: A response can take many forms, from the contraction of a unicellular organism to external chemicals, to complex reactions involving all the senses of multicellular organisms. A response is often expressed by motion; for example, the leaves of a plant turning toward the sun (phototropism), and chemotaxis. Reproduction: The ability to produce new individual organisms, either asexually from a single parent organism, or sexually from two parent organisms.Of course, I might be able to debate that clouds are living organisms by the above definition. First provide me with a satisfactory definition of life, and I'll provide you with an example of abiogeneisis.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

The smallest unit of life by biologists is considered a cell, which means that amino acids are not life."A distinctive characteristic of a living organism from dead organism or non-living thing, as specifically distinguished by the capacity to grow, metabolize, respond (to stimuli), adapt, and reproduce"http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Life
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

OK, I've told you already that the law of biogenesis is regarding the germ theory of disease as set out by Louis Pasteur et al.It states that non-life can not produce life, as in if you sterilise a broth for example (as Pasteur did) and expose it to the atmosphere it will acquire microbes from the atmosphere. Pasteur proved that by isolating the broth from the atmosphere you can keep microbial life away from it (see his famous Swan-necked Flasks). This was a blow to the accepted (by the church) Idea of spontaneous generation, they argued that God was the only thing that gave life and that it could arise out of non-living materials.The law of biogenesis states nothing about abiogenesis, and that is that. Refute all you like but that is the truth.To assume that life can arise by it's own over night in a nutrient broth is idiotic by today's knowledge, one needs a hell of a lot more time than that to move through the multitudinous variation of complex molecules that would eventually lead to a model of replication. Once a replicator has been produced the chances of another are ridiculously low as all available molecules will start to be used in the new life form's metabolism.On the fourth link, incredulity and lack of knowledge of the Feynman sum over histories, does not a convincing argument make.But regardless of whether the Law of Biogenesis is the only thing we creationists have, it still does not refute the fact that no non-life has ever produced lifeI've already shown you why that's wrong.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

"there is no such thing as a beneficial mutation,"Mutation is just changes in the genome sequence, so positive mutation is possible."no life has ever been created from non-life,"Abiogenesis."there is no geologic column,"Why not?"the necessity for the Great Flood of the Bible and the Grand Canyon,"What? Is this trying to state the Great Flood would be required for the Grand Canyon to exist?
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

Have we seen positive mutations?He talks about that at the end of the series (I believe, not sure)Watch the video.Yes.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

Have we seen positive mutations?I've already highlighted two to you, but here you go.Sickle cell anemia, protected Africans from Malaria.Microbial antibiotic resistance.HIV immunity as pointed out before.Loss of colouration in Guppies as shown experimentally by John Endler.CCR5-delta32 gene frequency in European populations confers resistance to the bubonic plague. Photosynthetic Chlamydomonas green Algae using acetate as a carbon source when denied light over generations.As well as the Lenski experiments I've already shown you.There are more, but I believe my point is made.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

"positive mutations" occur in bacteria rather rapidly, look up antiseptic resistant bacteria.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

I already responded to another person about this... actually 2 people I believe... those bacteria were then reintroduced back into an environment with their parents and were killed off. If you would like I can find you the article that says that these bacteria and all the cases like this have been considered "crippled" but I'm too lazy to do it right now... if you look at my other posts, you'll find it.Actually, here it is: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cfl/mutations
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

The points I was going to make have been laid out pretty accurately about how this video has flaws and how evolution is very firmly implanted in the scientific community. I'd also like to add that refuting evolution, in a scientific viewpoint, is akin to refuting gravity. Both are theories- the highest level of scientific understanding. Evolution did not become a theory for no reason. And no evidence has ever gone against it.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

It is a fallacy to think just because the majority agrees with something that it is true or morally correct. Continued, it is also a fallacy to think that just because gravity is a theory and is accepted throughout the majority of the world that evolution could not be wrong because it too is a theory. Finally, there is plenty of evidence against evolution but people seem to ignore it.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

Are we really still doing this? There is not a single piece of evidence for creationism that can't be refuted, and just because we don't have a complete taxonomic and genetic record of every animal that has ever lived on Earth does not falsify evolution.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

Evolution is the change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

I'll make you a deal, lolzors93:I will watch and respond to each of the 24 videos in this series, if you agree to watch in respond to each video in this series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnJX68ELbAY He cites 15 falsehoods. Most of them are covered by one video but there are at least two that he breaks into two parts. Although there are less episodes in this series, the run times appears to be longer on the one I'm presenting, so watching them should require an similar investment of time for both of us.What do you say?
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

I watched your video and the entire thing was one big rant saying that creationism has no proof and that the majority is always right (meaning evolution). No evidence was shown against creationism or for evolution and it could be clarified as one big ad hominem attack, which implies that evolutionists are getting desperate.I watched your video, you said you would watch mine.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

It was a set up to rest of the series. And his point was not about proof for or against either creationism or evolution, but, in this specific video his entire purpose was to explain that evolution is not an inherently atheist subject matter. Are you SURE you watched this video? Anyway, as I said before, each video deals with a different aspect of the debate. As you continue into the series, you will notice considerable evidence in support of evolution. Now for some poetic justice. You said: No evidence was shown against creationism or for evolution and it could be clarified as one big ad hominem attack, which implies that evolutionists are getting desperate.And, in Hovind's video....no evidence was shown against evolution or for creation. He made a few statements that about certain known scientific facts being wrong. I can only assume that this part 1 is a set up to the rest of the series, because for now he doesn't support his claims AT ALL. Maybe in later videos?But most of the time, in this video, he repeats that text book are full of lies, but instead of showing any, he sites passages that he believes showcase an anti-creationist stance...arguable an ad hominem attack itself. But has yet to show any lies.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

There is plenty against evolution in his series. Watch the series! On the right hand side there will be 2-24, then on that video there will be 3-24....
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

Like I said...I will watch and respond to the whole series if you watch and respond to the whole series that I posted. Should take us about the same amount of time.All I was saying is that the EXACT same claim you made about my video could be levied against yours. But in both case this would be a hasty assessment, because in both cases the videos are setting up for the remainder of the series.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

As a show of good faith...I have elected to respond to you regarding part two of your series before you opted to respond to part two of mine...Question? Have you ever bothered to wonder why the Grand Canyon is so much Grander than most other Canyons? This is a good question, because it applies to both my understanding, and to Hovinds. I mean, he points out this fairly large lake...but there are and have been many lakes of that size during the proposed time of Noah's Flood. So, If Noah's flood actually happened, should we not expect MANY Grand Canyons?, at least if Hovind is correct? There should be at least 3 on each continent. But there are only 4-5 canyons on the planet that are of a similar magnitude. So why is the Grand Canyon so special? Geologic uplift. The GC is formed on the Colorado Plateau. The CP was formed by a unique geologic uplift that was created by the formation of the Rocky Mountains and the unusual mix of minerals that make up Western North America. Basically, the river was carving down AT THE Same time that the region was rising, which is why it was so deep. A former Earth Science teacher should know this since it is one of the most researched areas of modern geology and explains every "discrepancy" he mentions in his video. He also claims that the Grand Canyon has no delta, which is quite an embarassing thing for an Earth Science educator to say, since "Canyons" don't have deltas, the rivers that created them do. And the Colorado River has quite an impressive delta:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River_Delta
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

Where is the other video in his series? The dude doesn't do a very good job of organizing his videos and am too lazy to search... haha :P
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

What are you talking about? I have "1st Foundational Falsehood of Creationism" called up on my youtube in another tab. On the sidebar that shows related videos on the right, three down from the top in a video titled "2nd Foundational Falsehood of Creationism" by the same poster, AronRa...seems like a good place to check...
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

yeah, it isn't there.... haha but I'll search for it in the youtube search.... but i won't be able to watch it right now.. i have to shower and go see my grandparents! :) I'll do it later tonight!
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

Well, I'm looking at it right here on my screen, don't know why you can't see it. I did look for a playlist but they were out of order, so, since you are lazier than I am, I will organize them for you:1 st: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnJX68ELbAY 2nd: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFrkjEgUDZA&feature=relmfu 3rd: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnj7PlqmJ5o&feature=fvwrel 4th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80nhqGfN6t8&feature=relmfu 5th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzmbnxtnMB4&feature=relmfu 6th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3k0dDFxkhM&feature=fvwrel 7th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8Q2Db17v5U&feature=relmfu 8th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU-7d06HJSs&feature=relmfu 9th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qfoje7jVJpU&feature=relmfu 10th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MXTBGcyNuc&feature=relmfu 11th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dm277H3ot6Y&feature=relmfu 12th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TkY7HrJOhc&feature=relmfu 13th: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myfifz3C0mI&feature=relmfu 14th (part 1): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYsnVMjG4lk&feature=relmfu 14th (part 2): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XHbRGiQccM&feature=relmfu 15th (part 1): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wv6kgjOEL0&feature=relmfu 15th (part 2): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGmLDKQp_Qc&feature=relmfu
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

Thank you! :)This helps a lot! hahaThe minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

No worries :)
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

I'm going to ignore most everything about evolution and focus on the Jesus stuff.... Here is the citation again:http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm#4 God's anger cannot last forever with His people, which is what Micah 7:18 is talking about. Jeremiah 17:4 is talking about Hell and God;s eternal anger towards the unrighteous.There is a difference between testing someone and tempting. God tests people to see if they will follow His rules, etc. but He does not tempt people with evil.The next "contradiction" is about works based and faith based doctrine. As a Presbyterian (PCA/Reformed) I say that Faith = Justification + Works meaning that when we have true faith, not faith like demons, but saving faith, we want to do good deeds, which is a sing that we have been given salvation and that we truly believe.There is difference between "seeing" the Lord and "seeing" Him. Let me explain, Jesus has been seen, as can be seen in John 1:18 (which is mentioned in the video) where it talks about how Jesus (who rescues people from the anger of God the Father and makes them righteous and allows for people to be able to stand before Him face to face; the Trinity) has allowed people to see God. God the Father has never been seen and won't be until you accept Jesus allowing for you to see the glory of God. No man who is unrighteous can stand before God the Father without being destroyed.No where in there does God say He delights in burnt offering. It is pleasing to Him because it is a symbol of Jesus to come and is a metaphor for being made clean.No where in there does it say that God creates evil.This next one makes no sense either. Both verse mentioned say the exact same thing.... God created man after animals.The next one does the same thing... the men with Paul heard the voice but did not understand it.The context of Ecclesiastes 1:4 is that the earth will last and it will stay the same, even though generations will come and go. The earth and heavens will pass and a second earth and a second heavens will come again which is another way of interpreting it. Exodus 21:6 talks about a man serving another man "forever" however, men don't live forever implying that forever is not an eternity.There are numerous answers to this. "Ascend" can be referring to an act by which that person can do. Meaning, ascend by one's own power. Another example which I personally find the best answer is that Jesus is referencing back to Deuteronomy 30:12 and Proverbs 30:4 saying that only heavenly things are known by that which is form God. The context of the discussion in which Jesus says this makes sense to why it was said this way.I have already answered a number of contradictions, that should be good enough. If you truly care about answering the rest just ask me!Bible prophecies:The destruction of Tyre...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8_jV6R0_5A The destruction of Jerusalem...http://www.padfield.com/1998/matt24a.html Here are some others...http://100prophecies.org/Alexander the Great's biography was written 400-500 years after his death. Look at the citations on this: http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/index/pg79644
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

Part 3:Well actually not a lot to say here. I'm guessing most of his claims come in the next video. Let's see if I have time for that tonight.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

Well, I do you give you respect and admiration for your thorough and well researched answers. Simply put, you have managed to make me "lazier" than you :P...I do not have the time or energy, especially in this coming week to do a full response to each of yours. I will say that a lot of what you propose is incorrect. Many of your objections were actually addressed right there in the video series and your responses simply say "he is wrong." The sources you use are highly spurious.However I will grant you the victory in this one since I simply do not wish to put in the effort to go into all of this (not to mention hunting down links to challenge your assertions.)That being said: I am a man of my word. Therefore, over the course of this week, when I can find, I will watch and post responses to the remaining videos from the series you linked to. I should be able to do vid 3 within the next few hours, and will continue on when I can.
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

Take your time! haha I understand that everyone is busy at moments here and there! And honestly, I probably won't respond that much to what you have responded to when it comes to the Kent Hovind videos... quite frankly I just want you to watch it! haha :P
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: True

You lost me on "The First Video." And I suppose you have a point . . . but I'll get to it later. . . .
Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

If you wouldn't load the question with libel, I might be more inclined to agree with you.To say that someone lied is to say that they knew something to be different and they misrepresented what they knew. If you were to make the case "Evolution is not entirely accurate", I'd almost certainly agree with you. It's a theory, an evolving theory, one that attempts to rationalize the data its collected over time. On a broad level, it simply states that living things have changed over time (presumably to adapt to a changing environment). We've watched this happen before our eyes. On average kids are growing taller nowadays than they ever did in the past. Of course, it's because of improved nutrition. But the point is THEY STILL CHANGED. Whether or not is all traces back to a single-cell organism billions of years ago... well, that's more debatable, but it's theory. The only reason why people say things like 'Evolution is a lie' is because they believe that it conflicts with their belief in God. It doesn't. I'm not arguing for the existence of God now. I'm simply stating that there's not a contradiction there. Yes, it is possible to believe in God AND evolution. Many intelligent, enlightened people do. We have to past this black-and-white kind of thinking. Nothing is all one way and not another. There's a lot of gray in the universe. And when we realize it, it CAN BE a beautiful thing.