KnightWhoSaysNi

This thread has been set up to provide a Peanut Gallery for a FORMAL DEBATE between Constant Mews and afdave who will debate the following resolution:

"Resolved: that Genesis is demonstrably false as a historical record."

Constant Mews will affirm and afdave will oppose. The debate will have 5 rounds and Constant Mews will go first.

We ask that the formal debate participants refrain from posting in the Peanut Gallery until after the debate is over.

Enjoy the debate!

- KWSN, FD Moderator

_Naturalist_

Seriously, how is it possible to argue in favour of YEC based on the Genesis? It completely contradicts the evidence.

espritch

This does seem to be the equivalent of debating whether the world is flat.

Sven

Any bets that this will quickly end in a pissing match, leading to a forfeit? Just look at the thread negotiating the parameters, there the bickering already started.

Gooch's dad

You're probably right, Sven, but i hope it does play out as a full debate, just to show how incredibly silly YEC'ism is.

JonF

AfDave'll keep it up forever. There's no subject on which he's afraid to demonstrate his ignorance

AF DAVE'S UPDATED CREATOR GOD HYPOTHESIS
AFDave's UPDATED Creator God Hypothesis 2

Infiniteguy

why debate about this? it is obvious that Genesis does not entale a accurate hisotrical recorded. but i'm all eyes to see an escape to the contray.



kham

Sven

From there: "MY BACKGROUND I was first an Electrical Engineer [...]"

Occam's Aftershave

Unfortunately, AFDave Hawkins has used the ruse of formal debate elsewhere just to get an audience for his religious witnessing. Dave has no intentions of actually discussing physical evidence (or the lack of same), Dave just wants to PREACH to the heathens.

The 'debate' will go like this

CM "Here is geological evidence that the Earth is over 4.5 billion years old"
AFD "Nuh uh! Here is a C&P from AIG that says different!"
CM "Here is paleontological evidence that life on Earth has been here for over 3 billion years
AFD "Nuh uh! Here is a C&P from AIG that says different!"
CM "Here is genetic evidence that species we see today evolved over time and diverged from a set of common ancestors"
AFD "Nuh uh! Here is a C&P from AIG that says different!"
CM "Here is linguistic evidence that Human languages have a traceable history and that The Tower of Babel story never happened"
AFD "Nuh uh! Here is a C&P from AIG that says different!"

We've been watching AFDave go through this dishonest charade for more than a year now, both at antievolution.org and richarddawkins.net forums. IIDB will be no different.

If anyone doubts this, check out the formal debate section of RD.net. AFDave just finished a 'formal' debate where he supposedly defended a literal Noah's Flood. The regulars there compiled a list of questions and topics Dave flat out refused to discuss during the 'debate' - see the list here for a good laugh. Oh, and the results of the 'debate'? By a vote of the readers, the score was 146-1-1 DAVE LOST

uberhobo

If you read further, you'll find this little gem:

Abductive Reasoning
DATA: The surprising fact A is observed. (The finely tuned cosmos, biological machines, written 'holy' books, etc.)
LOGIC: But if B were true, then A would be a matter of course. (B is the God of the Christian Bible)
CONCLUSION: Hence, there is reason to suspect that B is true.

I've never heard of abductive reasoning before. Apparently it's a whole branch of logic that relies on affirming the consequent. I suppose it's a valid line of reasoning when you're brainstorming for hypotheses, in which you think of as many Bs as possible and decide which to test, but this guy is picking one and stopping there......

Holy shit, there are 369 pages of this crap. I highly doubt that this will end in a forfeit on AFdave's part. Mews has his work cut out for him.