Evolution/Macroevolution - you have whatever it is to give credence for it actually occuring.

Thank you for this debate. I am looking forward to this exchange. 
 

The Theory of Evolution is one of the most misunderstood theories in science, yet it is also the backbone of modern biology. Indeed, as Theodosius Dobzhansky stated, "Nothing in biology makes sense, except in the light of evolution." The Theory of Evolution explains not only the biodiversity of life but is vitally important in fields such as medicine and ecology.  

I. Misconceptions
 

1. Evolution is not true because it cannot explain the origins of life or the universe

Evolution is a theory on the biodiversity of life. It does not make any assertions to how life formed or how the universe came into being. This argument is an argument from ignorance. Just because we do not know yet how life got started or how the universe got here does not mean that evolution is false. This is like saying that the atomic theory of matter is false because we don't know the origins of the atom.

2. Evolution means atheism 

Again, this is false. The vast majority of Christians accept evolution and many great evolutionary biologists like Theodosius Dobzhansky and Francis Collins are committed Christians. Theodosius Dobzhansky was an orthodox Christian, Francis Collins is proudly an evangelical, and many prominent evangelicals like William Lane Craig and Biologos accepts evolution. I myself am a theist and gladly accept evolution based on the mountains of available evidence. 
 

II. Evolution by Natural Selection is an Observable Fact
 

A. “Micro” Evolution
 

We have observed evolution by natural selection both in the lab and in nature. When we expose bacteria to antibiotics, chance mutations enable them to form resistance to the antibiotic causing them to become stronger. The end result is bacteria with the favorable traits necessary to resist antibiotics resulting in deadlier diseases.

This is well-known as “micro-evolution” or “the change in allele frequencies in the gene pool.” This is so well-observed and documented that no creationist will deny this.

B. Speciation

Speciation is the emergence of new species from an ancestral species. This is probably the most important prediction of evolution. If evolution were true, then we should observe the formation of new species. As it turns out, speciation has been observed so many times [1] that even creationists accept it [2], although they try to rationalize it by denying that speciation perfectly fits the definition of evolution or by simply moving the goalpost.  

You can think of speciation like language: As time goes on, new words are added, people spread out, words change meaning, and thus new languages are formed. This is how Latin turned into Spanish, French, Italian, Romanian, and the rest of the romance languages from a single ancestral language. You can think of the minor changes in pronunciation and meaning to be “microevolution” and the emergence of new languages as “macroevolution.”

III. Genetics

A. Genetic Comparison

1. Human Evolution

In my opinion, genetics offers the most profound case for evolution. The closer related a specie is the more genetic material they have in common. Using genetic markers, we can trace with stupendous accuracy on how humans and other species migrated. When I got my DNA sequenced from ancestry.com, I was shocked to see just how accurate it was. Not only were they able to tell the region of Europe where I descend from, they were also able to pinpoint exactly where my family settled in the United States and they were even able to tell when they came!   

We can do this to trace human ancestry back to where humanity first evolved. Using mitochondria DNA, DNA that is passed on from mother to offspring, we can trace our maternal lineage back to Africa roughly 200,000 years ago [3].   

Using the same principles that determine paternity, we discovered that humans and chimpanzees are about 95-99% similar, which suggests that the two species are closely related [4]. What’s more, is that we can determine when humans and chimpanzees diverged. This is dated to about 7-8 million years ago [4]. Of course, as more genetic information becomes available and more studies are done, the more refined this date will become.

2. HIV-SIV

Using the same principles listed above, we can use evolution and genetics to learn when and how new diseases evolved and use that information to learn how to treat them. HIV is a perfect example. In the 1980’s, people were dying left and right of this new disease. Where did it come from and how did it evolve? Let’s find out!  

There are actually two main types of HIV: HIV 1 (most common) and HIV 2 (less common). Using genetics, we found that HIV evolved from SIV, a virus that infects non-human primates. Most likely, humans were butchering meat from an infected animal and that is how they initially came in contact. But there is a problem. Humans are naturally immune to SIV, so something had to happen. In his book Evolving: The Human Effect and Why it Matters, Dr. Fairbanks shows exactly how this happened [6]:

“The virus had to mutate into a form that could overcome natural immunity to SIV in humans. Mammals have a gene that encodes a protein called tetherin. This protein has evolved to confer resistance to retroviruses by tethering them to the inside of the cell they infect and preventing the virus from replicating. For SIV cpz to successfully infect a human, it had to overcome the suppressive effect of human tetherin.

The SIV cpz evolved by acquiring two anti-tetherin genenes called nef and vpu, one from each of the original monkey viruses that fused to form the chimpanzee virus. The nef gene mutated to overcome chimpanzee tetherin, but the vpu gene remained essentially insert. When the virus jumped to humans, human tetherin was so different that the nef gene could not overcome human tetherin. Instead, the vpu gene mutated to overcome human tetherin, allowing HIV-1 group M to infect humans.

A mutation in a second gene, called gag, was also required for the chimpanzee virus to jump to humans. Interestingly, a case in which HIV infected a chimpanzee is known, and the gag gene of this virus mutated back to the original form in the chimpanzee to successfully re-infect its ancestral host.”
 

B. ERVs

Endogenous retrovirus are viruses that incorporate themselves into our DNA. As I already pointed out, humans, bonobos, and chimps are 95-99% similar. This strongly suggests that we are closely related and share a recent common ancestor.

When we compare genetics, we can look at ERVs and use that to help us the dots. As it turns out, humans and chimps have thousands of ERVs in common [7]. So, either the ERV independently inserted itself into the same location thousands of times or we share a common ancestor who had it. The latter is far more likely.
 

Conclusion

Evolution is a theory on the biodiversity of life and explains how populations evolve over many generations. Evolution best explains the available data. 

Sources
 

1. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/evolution-watching-speciation-occur-observations/
 

2. https://answersingenesis.org/natural-selection/speciation/speciation-yes-evolution-no/
 

3. https://www.nature.com/news/genetic-adam-and-eve-did-not-live-too-far-apart-in-time-1.13478
 

4. https://news.janegoodall.org/2018/06/27/chimps-humans-monkeys-whats-difference/
 

5. https://www.pnas.org/content/109/39/15716
 

6. Fairbanks Evolving: The Human Effect and Why it Matters
 

7. http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CI/CI141.html
 

8. http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC214_1_1.html
 

Thank you for your arguments.

I do expect you to show or tell us where we can observe this ourselves without photos and things that are subject to manipulation.

I already gave an example of SIV - HIV evolution which you never addressed. I showed the exact mechanisms involved in SIV evolving into a completely new virus, HIV. In addition, creationists accept speciation but refuse to call it evolution.

But they couldn't tell you what animal non person of species it evolved from. Interesting.

We have similarities with stardust, right. Did we evolve from cosmic elements ?

Ah, the classic strawman and goalpost moving.

The question is, are you reading data and you just believe it or have you witnessed experimentation and study for yourself?

More strawmen.

For instance, cause and effect and producing after your own kind and everything reproducing after their own kind. We can observe and point to that all over the world.

What is a kind? Creationists can't even figure that out. Here's a quote from Answers in Genesis to drive this point home:

Hopefully by now the difference between species and kind is clear. A kind is a Biblically based taxonomic grouping based on reproduction. On the Linnean scale, the current consensus is that a baramin is approximately equivalent to the family level, but kinds both above and below that level exist. The created kind was made to reproduce, according to Scripture, and thus should be able to exchange genes either by reproduction, horizontal gene transfer, or environmental uptake.

Notice the goalpost moving? Creation "scientists" think that a kind is at the family level but think it could be higher or lower depending on the circumstances. It's whatever it is so we can avoid using the big evil evolution word.

An actual photo of creationists moving the goalpost.

Dropped arguments

My opponent drops the following observable evidence I have given for evolution:

1. ERVs
2. HIV - SIV
3. Conceded the misconceptions that I already debunked in the opening statement.

Please vote pro.

Thank you, Mal.

"I already gave an example of SIV - HIV evolution which you never addressed. I showed the exact mechanisms involved in SIV evolving into a completely new virus, HIV. In addition, creationists accept speciation but refuse to call it evolution."

Here's my address. Explain how this demonstrates a non human person became a human person. Preferably in a succinct practical layman's term structure.

More strawmen from my opponent. The SIV - HIV example provides a direct concrete example of macroevolution how one virus changed into an entirely new type of virus through specific changes in the genetic makeup. SIV could not infect humans, but with a few genetic tweaks the virus could now infect humans.

Populations evolve a lot like how languages evolve.Take, for instance, the Lord's prayer. This is the Lord's prayer in English over time [1]:

Old English

Fæder ure

þu þe eart on heofonum,

si þin nama gehalgod.

Tobecume þin rice.

Gewurþe ðin willa on eorðan swa swa on heofonum.

Urne gedæghwamlican hlaf syle us todæg.

And forgyf us ure gyltas swa swa we forgyfað urum gyltendum.

And ne gelæd þu us on costnunge,

ac alys us of yfele. Soþlice. 

Middle English

Oure fadir şat art in heuenes

halwid be şi name;

şi reume or kyngdom come to be.

Be şi wille don

in herşe as it is dounin heuene.

yeue to us today oure eche dayes bred.

And foryeue to us oure dettis şat is oure synnys

as we foryeuen to oure dettouris şat is to men şat han synned in us.

And lede us not into temptacion

but delyuere us from euyl.

Early Modern English (KJV)

Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.

Give us day by day our daily bread.

And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil.

Modern English (New English Translation)

So he said to them, “When you pray,[a] say:

Father,[b] may your name be honored;[c]

may your kingdom come.[d]

3 Give us each day our daily bread,[e]

4 and forgive us our sins,

for we also forgive everyone who sins[f] against us.

And do not lead us into temptation.”[g]

What happened? Over generations people adopted new words, new pronunciation, new spelling, and new grammar rules that shaped how we speak. There was never a first human being like there was never a first person to speak English. Each generation people were still able to communicate to their parents and grandparents; however you eventually get to a point where communication [in biological terms reproduction] is no longer possible: What was once one species became two or more and when one population was able to reproduce with another that became impossible. That is how macroevolution works.

Kind is that what is different from another. In this case , species.

Great! If a kind is a species and macroevolution is the change in species from one species to another then macroevolution is an undeniable fact.

Dropped Contentions

1. ERVs - My opponent still has yet to respond to this point
2. SIV - HIV - My opponent strawmanned and ignored the concrete example and detailed mechanisms
3. and many others

Evolution is a far better framework for understanding population mechanics. Creationism has not offered any viable mechanisms to understand these mechanics.

Please vote PRO

Sources

1. https://www.thehistoryofenglish.com/lords-prayer-old-english

Vote prob