[quote=xAsunaWolfx]By far, one of the biggest debates that exist on the planet at the moment is whether evolution is real.[/quote]

Actually, no, there really isn't a debate on the subject. It's a bunch of people who don't understand science claiming that evolution is a lie just because their religious text says something different. That's not a debate, that's willful ignorance. If a mechanic says your car's problem is a broken transmission but you say he's wrong because it's actually pixie dust in the exhaust pipe causing your problems, that's not a real debate, that's just gibbering nonsense. This is true of the supposed debate between evolution and creationism. Just as you should leave explanations of car problems to a mechanic, you should leave explanations of scientific questions to scientists.

Whether or not evolution is true is a scientific question, and [url=http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/section-5-evolution-climate-change-and-other-issues/]97% of scientists[/url] agree that evolution is a true and real thing. There have been quite literally zero scientifically peer-reviewed research articles in the past half a century that claim evolution is not real; or rather, there have been no such articles submitted to peer-review without getting exploded by the vast weight of evidence in support of evolution. Even if you were to give credence to the masses of people who have no business deciding what parts of science are true or false (just as scientists have no business telling you what is true or false in your matters of faith), 61% of non-scientists agree that evolution is a real thing (source same as last link) that has happened to humans and other animals. Many of them say it was guided by some deity figure, which is a faith-based stance, but this is still a strong majority that agree evolution is real. Also, that figure comes from polling done in the highly religious United States, which has one of the highest rates of denial of evolution in the world, easily the highest in what is considered the western world. It's not really a debate at this point, it's as much a fact of science as gravity, and you don't see many people claiming that gravity is a lie.

[quote]Evolution can be defined as the metamorphosis of a biological being over a time range. Evolution leads to diversity of beings.[/quote]

Your phrasing here is weird. It sounds like you're saying evolution happens on an individual level, such that one living thing will change significantly over its life span. Evolution is the process by which species of organisms gradually change over a period of time through genetic mutations being passed down though many successive generations. It is indeed the scientific explanation for why we have such a great diversity of species on our planet, so you've got that second sentence right.

[quote]It is of course no surprise that there is debate over the reality of it. Whether it is fact or fiction. Whether humans were created by a supreme being or just evolved from a previous being that had existed before. A seeming battle of Elah between the camp of evolutionists and that of the creationists.[/quote]

Well, it's kind of surprising to me, but then I'm one of the people who agrees with the overwhelming scientific proof.

Also, it's not as much of a battle as it may seem. Creationism is the idea that things were all created as they are now, so that's a direct contradiction to be sure, but the basic idea of there being some creator entity doesn't oppose evolution. There are plenty of religious people who believe in both evolution and some kind of creation by a supreme being. In fact, there exists in the theory of evolution no contradictions to the concept of a creator. Evolution is about how species change over time, but it has nothing at all to say about the origin of life, and it does not say "there is no god" anywhere in there. If we were to somehow discover today that there is in fact a supreme being and that it created life as simple single-celled organisms (or even the precursor stages to that) and then guided it all along according to its will and plans, that would jive perfectly with evolution as it stands today. It is the observation of how species change over time, not an explanation of exactly why it happens or where life came from.

[quote]The origin of man looks like one of those questions that won’t stop being brought into discourse. The design of the human body looks like a perfect work of art and there has always been a fascination as to where it came from. A fascination of the genesis of it all. Where it all began from. How we all got here[/quote]

Er, what? The human body looks like a perfect work of art? No. Work of art is highly subjective and debatable, but perfect? There are so many stupid problems and issues with the human body that no engineer in their right mind would allow to make it out of beta testing if they were designing the human body. I'll just go ahead and list some of them.

We have basically useless organs like the appendix that take up resources and become a major health hazard for many.

We have extraneous bones. Our tailbone serves no purpose, it's just a liability. Wisdom teeth exist.

There are other useless parts like male nipples that needn't exist.

We require air and food and water to live, but they all share the same intake hole. It's possible for food or water to go down the wrong hole and make us unable to breath, thus killing us. Super perfect design.

Our genitals are all sorts of stupid. Female genitals are only about an inch away from their solid waste disposal hole, and there are tons of bacteria and such that can cause all sorts of problem if they manage to get that far. Dangling male genitals are highly vulnerable and easy to damage to the point of uselessness.

And then we have just plain old stupid stuff that's left over from evolution being imperfect, which again are things that no intelligent designer would do, like the laryngeal nerve. Check out [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO1a1Ek-HD0]this video[/url] that shows a dissection of a giraffe that gives an example of just how stupid this nerve is, and also mentions how it's the same in humans. If you can't or don't want to watch the video, the short of it is that the laryngeal nerve goes from the brain to the larynx, which is a distance of a couple inches in a human body. However, this nerve does not go straight there, it instead goes all the way down the throat and then loops around one of the main arteries of the heart before coming back up and attaching to the larynx.

Art? Maybe. Perfect? Not even close.

[quote]This is most popular in Christianity, many do believe and find faith in this as per say the 'historical evidence' & recent movies coming out: God is real, noah's ark, etc.[/quote]

Ah, the so-called historical evidence of creationism. Fun fact: not even the Bible claims to be an accurate recording of history. Another fun fact: Christian biblical literalism wasn't really a thing until around the 18th century, before which the majority of Christians accepted that it was highly metaphorical and not meant to be a literal account of events. The idea that the Bible is a historically accurate document is rather new and was a product of the scientific revolution, where people got obsessed with the idea of literal truths courtesy of science giving truths about tons of cool things and then people decided to apply that to their faith as well for some reason. Oh, fun fact three: "faith" means trust in something without or despite evidence. The whole idea of saying the Bible is proof of things actually goes against the whole concept of faith.

That alone is enough to discount the idea of the Bible being historically accurate, but then you can go further and show how actual historical documents of the time say nothing of or utterly contradict the momentous events in the Bible. The idea is just ludicrous.

[quote]People try to discredit this with 'Holes in science' or ask why monkeys still exist. I'd refer to Charles dawrin's Theory of Evolution.[/quote]

Hah, asking why monkeys still exist, classic. I like to pose a question in response to that one: if God made Adam out of dirt, why is there still dirt? The response to that is usually a scathing "he only used some of the dirt" followed by a "duh" or an eye roll. Of course the retort to that is to explain that in the same way as only some dirt was used to make Adam, only some monkeys evolved into things that eventually became humans. Luckily this hasn't been necessary in years, because it seems people have realized that this is a really stupid attempt to attack evolution and exposes their fundamental misunderstandings about how it works.

Also, Darwin's stuff is pretty old. A lot of his thoughts on the subject have been found to be inaccurate, though the basic mechanics of evolution that he outlined have been supported again and again. I'd actually suggest this Wikipedia article that's appropriately titled [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_evolution]Introduction to evolution[/url] for anyone who wants to read up on what evolution is and how it works without needing to wade through heavy scientific terms.

[quote]I suppose that a species unable to adapt had became extinct at that point, but some do blame the extintion of the species of dinosaurs on an event in the bible, i believe it was an earth-wide flood. Some has claimed 'biblical historical evidence' on some of this.[/quote]

Most of the religious folks who look to the Bible for historical accounts of things that happened tend to also believe that dinosaurs didn't exist because they aren't mentioned in the book. They also tend to think that Earth is super young, like 6,000 years or so if I recall correctly, so they also tend to say evolution is wrong because it says things happened over the span of millions of years, and that just doesn't mesh with their estimate of how long the planet has existed. As I recall, they got the age of Earth by looking at those lists of "this guy begat that guy" in Genesis and added their estimated ages together all the way back to Adam to figure out when exactly things were supposed to have been created. This so-called historical evidence stuff is pretty amusing, honestly.

[quote]as to why this thread doesn't need to last long, i was assigned a creationism vs evolution essay due in about 3 hours (procrastination at it's finest) , and in this thread, it has already given me things to address.[/quote]

Oh, don't worry, I'm sure this thread will have a lot of activity even after you no longer have any need for it. It's a hot topic that will draw attention from all sorts of people. :hehe