The Life Foundations Nexus
HOW TO WIN ANY DEBATE ON EVOLUTION
Evolution proposes the existence of intelligent forces…WHICH HAVE NO INTELLIGENCE!
FIRST, be sure that your opponent is debating the subject of evolution for the right reason.
The right reason for your opponent to debate evolution is that they believe that they have proof that belief in evolution is better than disbelief in evolution. This is important because, unless this is true, the person you are considering debating is only a casual evolutionist. A casual evolutionist will eventually forget about evolution on their own or be unreachable by the truth since they are prepared to call truth falsehood and falsehood truth. On the other hand, the serious evolutionist believes that they have proof that belief in evolution is better than disbelief in evolution.
SECOND, begin to use the expression “the idea of evolution” in place of the expression “the theory of evolution.”
Evolution is nothing more than an idea. It is not a theory. This is explained below. Your justification for use of the expression “the idea of evolution” is that you know that there is no scientific basis for evolution. Your opponent might not like your choice of words but they cannot deny that your expression is correct. If your opponent insists that you use the word “theory,” remind them that, while you will not, they are free to do so. If they are still insistent, do not proceed with the debate since they have proven themselves to be casual evolutionists (see above).
Now, evolutionists do not have enough scientific data to support the classification of evolution as a theory or even a hypothesis. Webster’s says:
hypothesis, theory, law mean a formula derived by inference from scientific data that explains a principle operating in nature. hypothesis implies insufficient evidence to provide more than a tentative explanation <a hypothesis explaining the extinction of the dinosaurs>. theory implies a greater range of evidence and greater likelihood of truth <the theory of evolution>. law implies a statement of order and relation in nature that has been found to be invariable under the same conditions <the law of gravitation>.
THIRD, demand that either side can call a time-out at any time and that the time-out can be of any duration.
There is no reason for an evolutionist to refuse this requirement. A time-out might be necessary since your opponent might come up with information that you are unfamiliar with and are not, therefore, prepared to refute. Also, it might take you some time to get the material you need to refute your opponent.
FOURTH, show the damage that the idea of evolution has done and allow your opponent time to attempt to prove that the idea of evolution has done more good than harm. Alternatively, your opponent might attempt to show that evolution has done good. In that case, they must allow you time to prove that the idea of evolution has done more harm than good.
If your opponent is able to prove that evolution has done more good than harm, it is because they are better prepared than you. At this point, call a time-out, get the information you need to refute your opponent, and then resume the debate.
FIFTH, if a deadlock results or if your opponent is persuaded that the idea of evolution has done more harm than good but still insists that evolution be taught, end the debate.
If you reach a point where your opponent is unpersuaded by facts that prove the theory of evolution has done more harm than good, they have proven themselves irrational. End the debate. If they are persuaded that evolution has done more harm than good but still insist that evolution should be taught, they have proven themselves immoral. End the debate.
SIXTH, if your opponent is persuaded that evolution has done more harm than good and that, therefore, it should not be taught but still believes that evolution is true, proceed with the debate.
More later as time permits.
The Oratio Ad Anti Evolutio, the formal polemic against evolution, which utterly destroys the idea of evolution and against which all evolutionists have been left speechless, is being updated.