Dr Ian Plimer vs Dr Duane Gish - 1988 Sydney, Australia Debate [Part 01 of 16]

This is the unedited 3hr debate that took place in Sydney, Australia in 1988.


Dr Ian Plimer
Geologist and skeptic

vs.

Dr Duane Gish
Biochemist and creationist

Category:

Education

Tags:

• controversial
• evolution
• evolutionism
• evolutionist
• creationism
• creationist
• creation
• darwin
• darwinism
• debate
• christian
• christianity
• theology
• philosophy
• philosopher
• science
• scientist
• Sydney
• Australia
• 1988
• Ian
• Plimer
• Duane
• Gish
• Jim
• Lippard

[FreindlyRanger]

I am sceptical as to whether Dr. Gish is wearing his own hair.

[beriukay]

I have no idea what molecules to man is supposed to mean.

You seem to have garbled my cemetery analogy. The odds of digging up the bones of a species that is an immediate ancestor are slim-to-none, just like digging up, say, Ruth Bedford d. 1895 in Iowa, she's probably not either of our great grandmothers.

Information comes from people. In our absence, it is just chemical and physical reactions. DNA is a fun one because it has the awesome-but-non-magical property of self-replication.

[Drgamedood]

@Grant692 The fossil record isn't even the strongest evidence for evolution. It's more like the icing on the cake. There's genetics, Lenski's E coli experiment, Atavisms, homology, phylogeny, molecular evidence, etc.

[Grant692]

I'm a Christian, but I also find the theory of evolution to be rather compelling. Admittedly, the fossil record is desperately lacking, but each new discovery further bolsters the theory. It can't fully account for the diversity of life, evolutions of similar features (ears, eyes, etc), and many, many other holes, but the evidence we have so far makes evolution almost undoubted.

[RUKEAL]

Fossilisation may be a rare occurence but with 4 billion years to play with the evidence that one 'species' changed over time into a new one is severely lacking!

All we find are fully formed species in the fossil record.

Evolution of one species into the other is a delusion!

[fdasherv]

@RUKEAL Actually, fossilization is an extremely rare occurrence. The "perfect conditions" required are many and upon discovery of those conditions, scientists tend to search in likely areas. Every single one of the thousands upon thousands of fossils found rewrite the history of evolution. They never negate the theory, they bolster it. Evolution has been vilified for 150 years, but it keeps getting stronger with more evidence. Even without the fossil record, genetics alone prove evolution.

[beriukay]

@RUKEAL Seriously!

[BigLundi]

@RUKEAL Meh, well it's not like that's not without good reason I suppose.

[RUKEAL]

Evolutionists really believe that all life, over a period of 4 billion years, simply lay down and died in the perfect conditions for fossilization.

On top of this they believe in common ancestors for all life - even though the examples are not found in the fossil record.

Further to this, not even the slightest example of evolutionary change (from one species to another) has ever been recorded in the whole of human history!

Historically all we find are 'flood stories' not 'evolution stories'

[RUKEAL]

@BigLundi - Because main-stream science hold 'creationists' in ridicule - and would therefore, more often than not, find it beneath themselves to do so.

[RUKEAL]

@beriukay - Pity that - because the fossil evidence (all 4.2 billion years of it!) should be overwhelming.

[1337rofflecopters]

@5tonyvvvv So you've never watched any videos on abiogenesis? Plus, you're willing to believe that a God can have no origin, but everything else requires a creator? very convenient. Wait..... this is too stupid. You're a poe. a fake christian trying to make christians look bad just like edwardcurrent or tamtampamela.