The Instigator
Balstrome
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
emospongebob527
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Actions by a god would have been detected by science by now.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
emospongebob527
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/25/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 906 times Debate No: 26561
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

Balstrome

Pro

It is alleged and commonly accepted that gods interact with the realm, being the physical universe, that we humans exist in. I suggest that this is not so, because science has advanced to the level, where any such interaction would be immediately noticed by the machines and knowledge of science.

Science can now detect any changes in this reality, and to a greater degree detect the location of the cause of these changes, which today has shown that these causes are all within this reality and are knowable by science. In short form, there is nothing that science has found that science can not know. The result of this is that an action by a god from outside this reality onto something within this reality that causes a change to the thing in this reality will be detected by science.

A gods action can not affect in this realm while staying hidden from this realm. This means that as no effect has been detected, the existence of gods has been shown not to exist or to be irrelevant to this realm.
emospongebob527

Con

It is alleged and commonly accepted that gods interact with the realm, being the physical universe, that we humans exist in.


Can you please provide evidence for your claims.


I suggest that this is not so, because science has advanced to the level, where any such interaction would be immediately noticed by the machines and knowledge of science


Evidence has not been put forth.
Science can now detect any changes in this reality, and to a greater degree detect the location of the cause of these changes, which today has shown that these causes are all within this reality and are knowable by science.

Proof?

In short form, there is nothing that science has found that science can not know.

You haven't elaborated on this assertion.
The result of this is that an action by a god from outside this reality onto something within this reality that causes a change to the thing in this reality will be detected by science.


This contention is irrelavent given that you haven't elaborate on your previous claims.




A gods action can not affect in this realm while staying hidden from this realm.


Proof?

This means that as no effect has been detected, the existence of gods has been shown not to exist or to be irrelevant to this realm.



I'm sorry but it appears that the BOP has been misplaced.

Debate Round No. 1
Balstrome

Pro

There is no claim, I just report what is commonly accepted by people generally about gods. I make no claims that gods exist, that they interact with this realm or anything of that nature. I just lay out the facts as I see them, as a base for my actual claim that gods (if they exist) do not interact with the reality that we exist in.

I support this claim by the fact that science has never managed to detect any interaction into this reality or within this reality that could only be the result of a god. I suggest that there is no effect that has been detected that would require a god to be involved in it, or to be the creator of that effect. And the reason that I suggest this, is because some of the major attributes of gods actively go against what is observed in reality currently.

Namely, that every effect noticed does not require a supernatural explanation for it. The key word "every" means all that has been noticed in the whole of the existence of this reality. I could present a list of everything that has ever been noticed, discovered or reasoned to be, and not one of those things has a need to have a unnatural creator or maintainer of itself, but space available makes this practically impossible.

So being unable to present everything that is for testing, one would be force to ask what would make this claim invalid, and that would be the presentation of something that only a god's interaction could provide the falsification.

As evidence I would offer that ability of science to either provide a complete answer for an event or object, or to be able to provide reasons to exclude the possibility of non natural interactions in the causing of the event or object. Again actually evidence for every possible event notice or object in existence would be impractical, so the route of falsification has to be followed.

Science can now detect any changes in this reality, and to a greater degree detect the location of the cause of these changes, which today has shown that these causes are all within this reality and are knowable by science.

As to the requested proof for this, that would be the answer supplied for every event observed, object discovery and possible existence reasoned. This proof would be that there is no need to suggest a god had to be involved because there is always a better, easier and more complete answer in the natural realm.

A god answer for any real thing, is unnecessarily more complex because of what a god would have to do to accomplish the action. This action would be the changing of the whole of the universe, including both past and future to allow for the god to fit the change into the remade universe. While this is possible from a god's ability, a much simple explanation is always available for every event or object. Which allows the use of Occam's Razor to determine which would be the better answer. If one would rather claim that a god would use this ultimately complex method, constantly and it would have to be constantly going on involving every event and object that ever existed in the past and will ever exist in the future, then one would have a "god" that is nothing more than the universe itself. This would be acceptable except for the problem that there are explanation for events and objects that seem not require unnatural causes and have rational natural causes. This demands either a reason for the unneeded complexity of the gods management or gods are unnecessary for events and objects to occur.
emospongebob527

Con

There is no claim, I just report what is commonly accepted by people generally about gods. I make no claims that gods exist, that they interact with this realm or anything of that nature. I just lay out the facts as I see them, as a base for my actual claim that gods (if they exist) do not interact with the reality that we exist in.

Proof???

I support this claim by the fact that science has never managed to detect any interaction into this reality or within this reality that could only be the result of a god. I suggest that there is no effect that has been detected that would require a god to be involved in it, or to be the creator of that effect. And the reason that I suggest this, is because some of the major attributes of gods actively go against what is observed in reality currently.

That is exactly the problem, you are not giving evidence for your claims, once you do this I can successfully refute your arguments.

Please give evidence.


Namely, that every effect noticed does not require a supernatural explanation for it. The key word "every" means all that has been noticed in the whole of the existence of this reality. I could present a list of everything that has ever been noticed, discovered or reasoned to be, and not one of those things has a need to have a unnatural creator or maintainer of itself, but space available makes this practically impossible.

Then I suggest you cite some, because making assertions without arguments is not getting you anywhere.

So being unable to present everything that is for testing, one would be force to ask what would make this claim invalid, and that would be the presentation of something that only a god's interaction could provide the falsification.

What makes this claim invalid, is the lack of evidence.

As evidence I would offer that ability of science to either provide a complete answer for an event or object, or to be able to provide reasons to exclude the possibility of non natural interactions in the causing of the event or object. Again actually evidence for every possible event notice or object in existence would be impractical, so the route of falsification has to be followed.

This should be explained before I can negate it.

Science can now detect any changes in this reality, and to a greater degree detect the location of the cause of these changes, which today has shown that these causes are all within this reality and are knowable by science.

Evidence, please?

As to the requested proof for this, that would be the answer supplied for every event observed, object discovery and possible existence reasoned. This proof would be that there is no need to suggest a god had to be involved because there is always a better, easier and more complete answer in the natural realm.

This is unrelated to your resolution.

A god answer for any real thing, is unnecessarily more complex because of what a god would have to do to accomplish the action. This action would be the changing of the whole of the universe, including both past and future to allow for the god to fit the change into the remade universe. While this is possible from a god's ability, a much simple explanation is always available for every event or object. Which allows the use of Occam's Razor to determine which would be the better answer. If one would rather claim that a god would use this ultimately complex method, constantly and it would have to be constantly going on involving every event and object that ever existed in the past and will ever exist in the future, then one would have a "god" that is nothing more than the universe itself. This would be acceptable except for the problem that there are explanation for events and objects that seem not require unnatural causes and have rational natural causes. This demands either a reason for the unneeded complexity of the gods management or gods are unnecessary for events and objects to occur.

This is unrelated to your argument.
Debate Round No. 2
Balstrome

Pro

Balstrome forfeited this round.
emospongebob527

Con

Resolution Negated.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by rahuljain 4 years ago
rahuljain
Too much circular reasoning in pro's logic. Could be easy win for con if he can exploit them.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Smithereens 4 years ago
Smithereens
Balstromeemospongebob527Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro gave some effort into his posts, yet they lacked substance and verification, Con merely just stated this and counted that as an effective rebuttal. This is why I give 2-3
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 4 years ago
Ore_Ele
Balstromeemospongebob527Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed to present any argument for their claim. Because of this, Con had nothing to address.