Debate: Evolution is a lie
Side: False

“I agree that the majority of people even Christians agree with evolution. But just because a majority agrees on something does not make it right.”His argument was not an ad populum argument. He was simply highlighting how evolutionary theory is not inherently atheist. Maybe you don't need that lesson, but many creationists do. “ There is no fossil record (which is supposedly in the geologic column) because there is no geological column!”To say that there is no fossil record is to argue that there are no fossils, that there aren't countless fossils found all over the planet all the time showcasing thousands of species of plant animal and even bacteria both living and extinct, that the people who found these fossils haven't kept track of where they were found, their condition and the environment in which they were embedded, that they haven't been thoroughly studied and compared against other fossils and living organisms. To say that there is no fossil record is to say that the entire occupation of paleontology does not exist.As far as “no geologic column”...that is an even MORE ludicrous statement. Rock formations are everywhere and has been very closely inspected and studied. Numerous methods of both relative and absolute dating have been developed, tested and successfully used for quite some time now. There are countless ways to observe they Earth and deduce its age as well as deduce the circumstances that form certain formations, types of minerals and geologic phenomena.  “What evidence for evolution?”The evidence of overwhelming. As you follow this series you will see plenty of it, and he just scratches the surface. After you watch it all, I will happily provide you a near infinite supply of sources, links, book recommendations and logic that confirm evolution.  “There are too many similarities between the books of the Bible from multiple people who had never met or read any other Scripture passages to say that it is not inspired by God.”Similarities? Care to explain every single contradiction shown in this video?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB3g6mXLEKk&feature=player_embedded“Then, they are too different to be seen as a conspiracy/collaboration to spread lies, unlike evolution.”They should not be different at all if revealed by God, assuming God cannot or would not lie to them. Meanwhile, the reason that evolution theory is so consitent from on researcher to the other is a sign of its veracity, not a “conspiracy”. Although of course there is collaboration within the scientific community. Why would there not be?  “The men who did write the Bible also made many prophecies that have come true and did many miracles.”Name one that prophecy that is a) the result can be verified independently from the Bible, b) is specific enough that it could not be misinterpreted, guessed at or dismissed.  “There is much historical evidence for Jesus Christ and Hs miracles.”Please provide a link. All non-Biblical evidence I've seen was written well after the time of Jesus and not by people who actually met him or witnessed his miracles. This evidence only confirms that there was a group of people who believed in him, not that the Biblical depiction of him was accurate.“Saying that God would not allow differing religions is a logical fallacy because we don't know the will of God.”He did not say that God would not allow other religions. He is saying that the inspired word of a perfect being should be expected provide unity, particularly as it is spread over time and space. Instead, it seems to promote disunity and conflict. Why?“ Radiocarbon dating is proven false a number of times so the Dead Sea Scroll argument is refutable.”Not true. You'll have to site evidence for this.  “The apocryphal gospels were not what was taught in the early church nor by the apostles.”So Paul Myer, the historian in this video (and also a devout Christian) and numerous other historians who specialize in this are dead wrong. At best we can say that there is not consensus about what exactly happened during that period, but there is very strong historical evidence that the early days of Christianity saw the Bible be compiled and edited due to politics and de facto popularity contests, and it is very well established that there have always been (and still are) countless conflicting interpretations of the Bible. Interpretation should not even be an issue in something that is completely true.  “Go to this site: http://dgreenruf.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15:how-can-we- trust-the-bible-as-true&catid=2:article&Itemid=12  and look at "God’s Word Has Been Faithfully Transmitted." “I went to the site, but did not find an article with that title. “Bible contradictions answered: http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm”  Obviously I did not read the whole thing, but I am pretty experienced with apologetics concerning scriptural contradictions. As often as not it boils down to interpretation. This is risky business considering all of the translation involved. At the very best: the modern Bible is confused and confusing, probably very diluted from its source, and so open to wildly different interpretations that many people who have claimed to know what he wants have gotten into conflicts and caused the Church to constantly splinter. Most factions can be verified by certain verses or interpretations and denied by others, and objective analysis makes it far easier to rule out all of them than it does to confirm any. “Intelligent Design is putting science into religion... look at the Discovery Institute.”The various members of the Discover Institute stopped behaving scientifically years ago. Most have had extreme difficulty passing peer reviews because they brazenly ignore the scientific method in order to reach their conclusions, which defeats the whole purpose of science and makes their claims unverifiable. “3) Paul met Christ on the road to Damascus and without understanding anything about Christianity instantly knew everything there was to know about the religion (as advocated by the other apostles that were alive at this time) and believed it.”It is also said that many who encountered the Buddha learned the Dharma simply by being in his presence or hearing his voice. It is not difficult to imagine followers making these kinds of claims in order to make their favored figure look more powerful. For now this is all I have time for. I do intend to watch and respond to the next video in the Hovind series within the next 24 hours or so, though.