azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

You got that right cyber.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

The process of evolution is fact. We have provably observed the processes that encompass this term, do not confuse this with theory of a common ancestor. Evolution simply explains the morphing from one genetic makeup to the next.The theory of a common ancestor, and the term theory doesn't imply uncertainty as quantum theory is yet to be disproved and the theory of gravitation obviously stands, seems right to me. There are plenty of fossil records to show this process and we've mapped enough genes to see the remnants of these transformations. Even if not 100%, it's a fairly clear pointer, wouldn't you think?
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Yes it is true. BUT it we all know that is not what many scientists try to communicate when they speak of evolution.. It is only when faced with logical sensible arguments they give testament to its true meaning..
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

It has not been proven and i don't think it can be...think about it this way they say humans evolved from apes or whatever right? yet have you ever seen an ape evolve into a human yourself? alot of people debate that what i cannot see i do not believe but i'm almost sure no one has seen an ape evolve into a human we my have similar looks but it doesn't mean we have evolved from apes...yes i believe in god.. and i have never seen him but god makes more sense to me then evolution ever will. show me! a documentary or something when an ape has evolved into a human
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

Us evolving from chimpanzees (yes, it is chimps that we share the most DNA with, not apes, and not monkeys), is merely an idea just because their DNA is so similar to ours. It doesn't make the theory of evolution what-so-ever. Evolution is just the process of change or growth through genetics, mutations, and natural selection. Which has been proven. When a scientist genetically modifies the DNA of a fly successfully, it has evolved. (No, really, I recall reading about a study of them inserting a different wing color into the flys DNA and evolving the fly successfully with the new wing color). It's pretty dang simple. It has nothing to do with the creation of humans. There is absolutely not enough evidence going anywhere to lead to a decent idea of where we came from. And you learn about the history of homosapiens through archaeological anthropology, which I suggest everyone should study because most of you seem to pulling crap out of your butts.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Chimps are members of the ape family as are we, there are five in total including orang utan, gorilla and bonobos.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Because we are pokemons!More evidence points to a designer than to a coincidence.When the scientists CREATED the new fly, it evolved. Problem there.... Nature does not inject DNA into other unrelated animals. The only way another species is created is when they procreate... If they do not procreate with their relatives the offspring is sterile. Evolution is artificial. You said it yourself.Scientists almost speak of Nature as having a mind .God has mind though :). Only Natural selection ''could pick out with unerring skill the best of varieties'' a quote from Darwin. All of you who accept evolution admit it yourself that it has not been proven AND IT WILL NEVER be proven because it is not true, and is directly related to practices that are completely unrelated to science such as freemasonry.Shame on you scientists! you aren't supposed to be involved in secret societies that believe in ancient mysteries and golems and such... Such beliefs are inconsistent, and shows the originators of this silly theory's true intentions. To control the goyim. Or cattle. The sheep! who do not think for themselves!
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Correct the only way that either side could be proven is wether or not we can prove or disprove God
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: proven not proved

By the way, my good fellow, the word is "proven", not "proved"
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

"Prove" it, my good fellow,Don't "proven" it,By the way
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

As I prepare to answer this question, I realize I have essentially no knowledge about the theory of evolution, besides Darwinism and the title. But the title itself is enough for me to know that it hasn't been scientifically proven: it is the THEORY of evolution. Much like the Big Bang THEORY. While it is probable that these events happened, it is not certain. And while I believe that they have happened, it is not certain.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

Yes, you are right, it is impossible to call it a certainity, but for this reason:All evidence for evolution is proven. The EVIDENCE is fact. The problem is it is impossible to say "This evidence means X, X exactly, and X only." It bothers me when people say "it is only a theory" to disprove it, for they are confusing the word "theory" with "idea."Here's a tip: don't use the Big Bang Theory as an example as another theory, for it is widely disputed. Use the Theory of Plate Tectonics. Anyone to not believe in that is a lunatic.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Honestly, this was so long ago that I don't even remember what my argument was. So... yeah?
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

By way of the scientific method, it cannot be proven in this day of age. It is still a theory.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

That is actually not true. The term theory is the same term used to describe many other scientific ideas that are widely accepted. For example, atomic theory; any scientist who said that they disagreed with this would be laughed out of any reputable institution. Also, to give you a more common example, the "theory" of gravity. It is a theory because almost nothing in science is proven beyond completely resonable doubt. As for the statement that it can't be proven, this too is inaccurate because people have conducted experiments in which they have witnessed microevolution of simple organisms. There has also been domcumentation of the speciazation of numerous animals in recent history. If you would like to know more or doubt what I am saying go to youtube and search the user "thunderf00t." He has made an entire video series called "why people laugh at creationists." (I apologize about the spelling)
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

True , but there again ,atomic theory and the the theory of gravity though we can't directly observe them , we are able to test and prove using the scientific method.Just because something is widely accepted as being true does not give it status as a theory.To do so opens the doors to make the same mistakes as has been done in countless years past. As for calling variations within a species "microevolution" as though that has anything to do with evolution, any scientist should be ashamed to cover under that sham.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

I thought science had proven the weightlessness of space and low gravity on the Moon? Wouldn't that give more evidence to the theory of gravity, beyond that of evolution?
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Widely accepted... That dose not mean SHIT! why? because if it is accepted doesn't mean its the truth. Louis Pasteur proved that bacteria was the cause of disease when everyone thought he was a mad man.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOTlNNsBqbA
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

True.The wording of the question betrays an underlying misunderstanding of science. ...which seems to be the reason people think evolution is legitimately doubtable in the first place.Or maybe it was an honest mistake.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

Just like Pluto orbiting the sun completely and gravity! They're theories, but in the scientific way of using the word
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Aha! Exactly! And we now know that pluto is a PLANETOID! Not a planet.Percival Lowell and Clyde Tombaugh were blind fools! - to think they discovered a planet! Now, thankfully from the perspective of 20/20 hindsight we can arrogantly scoff at the error of their ways, for we now know that pluto is a PLANETOID, and that Percival Lowell and Clyde Tombaugh's contributions were actually counterproductive to the advancement of what we today call science...Thanks to the International Astronomical Union's (IAU) decision Pluto is a dwarf planet! Modern reality is defined not by the insane direct observation of physical reality by individuals peering into a tube, but decided upon through CONSENSUS of the GROUP. Certainly the individual mind has no value in todays society, and only the GROUP MIND can come to any real conclusion in the modern sense. And if you disagree and look up at the stars and think you see an object, that is just your personal opinion.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Exactly what I think
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Is it not absolutely without a doubt flawlessly claimable, therefore, to be truly proven, absence of doubt must be the case.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

You are calling into question the very nature of certainty. The question asks whether it has been "scientifically" proven, not whether it is "absolutely without a doubt flawlessly claimable."
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

No, but i do call into question the nature of your uncertainty.Consider yourself Disputed.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

If what you say is true, then nothing at all is scientific fact. If even one person doubts, unreasonably or not, even the most fundamental laws of physics are only theories.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

No, it hasn't been proven. Until you can take me back in time, there is no way to prove it, just like the theory of gravity.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

It not only has been utterly, and incontestably proven, but it is logically sound. In case you don't understand what is meant by biological evolution, here's the definition: "The change in the genetic composition of a population over successive generations.". You only have to run through the thought experiment of two tribes interbreeding over generations to convince yourself that it happens.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

I think you'll find it's the law of gravity; and next time you drop a brick and it floats, call me.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

If evolution was true, then i pose one question to all of those who agree with the Darwhin(sp?) theory. You look at every other type of evolution, teradactyls to birds or something like that. when the teradactyls evolved, they themselves went extinct. If we came from monkeys, and we have been around for thousands of years, then logically wouldn't the monkeys be extinct? When they supposedly evolved into us then wouldnt they themselves died out? But obviously they did not because their population only started to go down when we started to poach them. I challenge anyone to posed a better argument on the fact that we did come from monkeys
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

Actually, I'm not sure it's been proven. I do think that human evolution is what scientists say it is, in that we evolved from primates, but it hasn't been proven.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

No, evolution has yet to proven. Evolution consists of an organism who progressed into a more complex collection like animals, then into homosapiens,then into what we are today. If this were true, why has the evolution process ceased, why arent there half monkey,half men walking around who have just entered the middle cycle of evolution, why aren't we evolving to some strange terrestrial body? These questions obviously can't be proven. So no, evolution has not yet been proven.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

Evolution has not "ceased" in any animal. I think you are a little delusional on the subject. Let me clear this up for you:The transition of "ape" to homo sapiens is not a process that occurs through one generation."why aren't we evolving to some strange terrestrial body"For the same reason, the whole transition to a "new species" is not a transition that occurs on one generation. And what do you mean by some "strange terrestrial body"? You mean something different than what we are at this stage? For the same reason, it is not a one-generation process. Why would you not cause us a strange terrestial body today?and "why aren't there half monkey half men who have just entered the middle cycle of evolution"Evolution has no scripture that is followed. There is no one path that all species must mutate with, which is the reason why chimpanzees still exist to this date.And by half monkey half man I might interpret that as a neanderthal, and those coexisted with homo sapiens for some time. Also if you want to see a half human half monkey today, you're gonna have to have sex with a monkey (although i am unsure if that would work out).
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

You ever notice how each of us make logical statements, and get down voted, and no responses are given to our arguments, except mockery and ridicule, or no response at all? This is because we are right. We REASON with them, but they do not reason with us. It leads me to the very illogical question of whether they came from primates in truth!
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: As close as science can do

Maths is the only branch of science that offers 100% proof of its arguments. Evolution while backed up by a massive amount of evidence could never be proved beyond all doubt as there is always the chance that evidence has been misinterpreted. People used to believe that the world was flat and look what happened to that idea! Ok so science has come a long way since then but we still have huge bias in the fossil record and gaps in our knowledge that will probably never be filled. We will never be completely sure.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

evolution has never been proven and will never be proven because it never happened. on that note you also can't prove creationism ever took place because it just happened. there is nothing intelligent about the thought you evolved from hydrogen gas or any other non living thing.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

idiot. please tell me why telomeric DNA exists at the center of the 2nd chromosome.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Although I firmly believe in evolution, it is only a theory, and even though theories have evidence and are backed up with facts, they are not 100% true and can probably never really be proven, like the Big Bang Theory. But just because something is a theory does not mean people cannot believe in it; I personally believe in both evolution and the Big Bang.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Why is it more reasonable to conclude common descent rather than common design from the similarity we see among species. I would argue that common design is far more reasonable. Here is why. This is a quote from the article and the full article can be found at the link below.ConclusionThe methodology for inferring common descent has broken down. Proponents of neo-Darwinian evolution are forced into reasoning that similarity implies common ancestry, except for when it doesn’t. And when it doesn’t, they appeal to all sorts of ad hoc rationalizations to save common ancestry. Tellingly, the one assumption and view that they are not willing to jettison is the overall assumption of common ancestry itself. This shows that evolutionists treat common descent in an unfalsifiable, and therefore unscientific and ideological, fashion.Meanwhile, as far as the data is concerned, the New Scientist article admits, “Ever since Darwin the tree has been the unifying principle for understanding the history of life on Earth,” but because “different genes told contradictory evolutionary stories,” the notion of a tree of life is now quickly becoming a vision of the past — as the article stated, it’s being “annihilated.” Perhaps the reason why different genes are telling “different evolutionary stories” is because the genes have wholly different stories to tell, namely stories that indicate that all organisms are not genetically related. For those open-minded enough to consider it, common design is a viable alternative to common descent.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

It's all a theory. Scientist don't have a clue when there trying to figure out how life actually got started. Another debunked remember Ida it was supposed to be the missing link and they gave it a huge media plug telling the whole world this is it. Well today they went back on it and said that it's not even close it was some kind of cat. Just like on National Geographic 30 years ago when they showed an ape like skull on the from cover only to find out later that it was a hoax, and it was sold that this is it. It has to make you wonder if there is a agenda behind it.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

There is more than one area of evolution.1. Microevolution (smaller changes throughout the life time of an organism through environment)2. Macroevolution (large changes in species)Macroevolution has not stood the test of time with its testing. It is propaganda for the most part.Microevolution has stood the test of time and is an obvious reality. There are hypotheses, theories, and proven facts/laws...Microevolution seems to fit each category, but macroevolution is an hypothesis, and possibly a theory at best.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

I have a few questions for all you evolutionist. Do you have any proof that evolution is real? Is it true that Dinosaur bones are millions of years old? How can a random event create a life that is too complex for us to understand. Why is it possible for our proteins to our cells together? What method do they use? How can you prove evolution without any solid evidence that is rock hard. How can you form a rock with nothing except a big explosion. I am totally sure that God made the universe.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has

I have proof that evolution is real. It's called telomeric DNA on the 2nd chromosome.You should learn some very basic grammar. Your mind needs to evolve. Trust me on this.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

Not until the governments allow scientists to tell the truth, it has not. Until it is publically admitted that the missing link is not of Earth origin, we will continue to complexify a very simple equation for the sake of money and power. If the Earth were to accept and realize a purposeful past of genetic mutation, and man were to realize our origins and full potential there indeed will be a shift in the elements of capitalism...perhaps it's existence completely...NO...TELL THE DAMN TRUTH
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

I'll post in the 'No' list but actually the answer is yes and no. Micro evolution is a scientific fact, macro evolution is completely unproven
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

May I ask, how does a scientist, whether evolutionist or creationist, examine a fossil according to the scientific method? I am supposing everyone knows what the scientific method is. How can he scientifically prove that his dating is accurate up to millions of years or that God did it? How does the fact that there were dinosaurs prove evolution or disprove creation? Of course scientist likes to think that they are arriving at their conclusion based solely on the evidence with out any previously biasing ideas. The truth is, if an evolutioni¬st finds evidence that seem to indicate creationis¬m, they will always suspect and look for other evidence that will explain away the first. Just the same a creationist will look for explanations of any findings in the light of intelligent design. How is one justified and the other not acceptable?”
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

no it has not we cannot journey back in time and see. yet it has not been proven wrong it is an opinion and it will continue to be that way
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

As I read through your post it is obvious that most of you are well read and have put a lot of thought into your statements, but you all are running around in circle as have the scientific community since the age of Enlightenment. After the Dark ages, in which the Catholic Church had ruled most of the known world, and had committed many atrocities in the name of God. Man decided that they did not need God and have been trying to explain their existence without a maker. Through many theories from evolution to the Big bang theory and many more. The Big Bang Theory, supposedly billions possibly trillions of years ago that space was void of all matter, in other words nothing. Then a giant explosion happened and from that matter formed and so on. The Question is what caused the explosion? There was nothing there, no gases no molecules atoms nothing to cause any kind of reaction. So that implies that something or someone had to put things into action. Evolution _The theory of evolution has many problems. No one can argue that all things change over time that is fact. Humans have changed over the centuries from hair color, skin color, height , strength and intelligence and so on but we are still human. To say man came from apes is contradiction of the evolution theory. The purpose of evolution is to improve survivability. The harsh conditions of the Earth would have dictated otherwise. Apes went from having a nice warm fur to having to kill other animals just to make clothes to keep warm, this does not make since. But let us get back to the real argument. These theories are nothing, but mans attempt to prove that God does not exist so they can do anything that they want and not feel bad. Without God there is no right no wrong it is survival of the fittest. Remember Man has been trying to prove this sense the end of The Dark Age. You would think that after a few hundred years of this we would except the facts, God does exist. You can’t take dead matter and make life it is impossible. So the only logical explanation is that we have a creator.
Debate: Has evolution been scientifically proved?
Side: It has not

We may share some genetic similarities with other species, but where is the proof that we evolved from any other life form? How can science account for the reproduction that would be necessary for one species to evolve into another, such as egg laying birds and reptiles into live birth mammals? I can understand a species adapting to it's environment, but not evolving into a totally different life form.