The Instigator
Dale.G
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
DeusMortisEst
Con (against)
Winning
51 Points

Atheism has no proof and Evidence that Atheism is accurate and correct

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 10 votes the winner is...
DeusMortisEst
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/14/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,546 times Debate No: 29166
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (10)

 

Dale.G

Pro

Atheism say there is no God thus the Atheist shift the burden of proof upon them selves thus Atheist cannot defend their position of saying there is no God I got a question for Paddy to try to answer this one question what Proof and Evidence do you have that say's Atheism is accurate and correct?.
DeusMortisEst

Con

Atheists do not necessarily say there is no god. Some (myself included) will only go as far as saying the existence of a god is highly unlikely.
To answer your question, I cannot prove that atheism is 'accurate and correct' as you put it, simply because atheism is not a proposition to be proven. It is a position taken in response to the proposition that there is a god. The position of atheism is, in fact, merely skepticism. If I were to see some conclusive evidence for the existence of god I would not be skeptical, but because no evidence has been presented to me I am skeptical of the claim that there is a god.
In fact, Dale, you complain that we shift the burden of proof, but in fact since we are rejecting the claims of theists, it is not up to us to prove our position. It is up to you to convince us.
So go ahead Dale. Convince us.
Debate Round No. 1
Dale.G

Pro

OK Paddy you said Atheists do not necessarily say there is no god.
/ Me Quote Paddy I would have to disagree with you, some of people do say there is no God,' in this Youtube video all you got to do is go to the comments, and you will see that some people say There isn't a God." or "God doesn't exist here is the link http://www.youtube.com...
I Dale believe in God :)

/ Me QUOTE Paddy you said this to me To answer your question, I cannot prove that atheism is 'accurate and correct'
/ Me Quote so Paddy that means Atheism cannot disprove God, Atheism has no proof and Evidence for being accurate and correct :) Checkmate

/ Me Quote so Paddy tell me this if you cannot prove Atheism to be accurate and correct then Atheism has being defected right right. lol

no one can be a Atheist why because like you said Paddy I cannot prove that atheism is 'accurate and correct'

/ Me Quote I say checkmate Paddy Atheism is madness yahoo I would like for Paddy to try to answer this next question I got for him, Atheism need to have proof and Evidence to be real.
DeusMortisEst

Con

Yes, SOME atheists state with certainty that there is no god, but what I said was that atheists don't necessarily say there is no god, so in fact you aren't disagreeing at all.

"if you cannot prove Atheism to be accurate and correct then Atheism has being defected right right. lol"

I think you mean defeated, and no it doesn't. Absence of evidence does not necessarily make a position wrong. If it did then theism would have ceased to be considered a serious and viable position centuries ago. Even so, atheism is not a proposition (as I have already pointed out) but rather is a position taken in response to the lack of adequate evidence for theism. You refer to atheism as being "madness" because it cannot be conclusively demonstrated to be an accurate position, however I would argue that calling it "madness" is false, as a position does not have to be accurate to be rational.

"no one can be a Atheist why because like you said Paddy I cannot prove that atheism is 'accurate and correct'"

Someone can be an atheist, even if atheism were to be conclusively disproven. Atheism is a position, it exists regardless of it's accuracy.

"Atheism need to have proof and Evidence to be real"

Atheism is real. There is no question about that.
Debate Round No. 2
Dale.G

Pro

Paddy what proof and Evidence do you have that say's Someone can be an atheist, even if atheism were to be conclusively disproven.

Paddy you have just shown that no one can be really a Atheist why because for someone to be a Atheist they need to have proof and Evidence that they are a Atheist but Paddy you make that very clear when you said this to me I cannot prove that atheism is 'accurate and correct'.

CHECKMATE PADDY
DeusMortisEst

Con

"Paddy what proof and Evidence do you have that say's Someone can be an atheist, even if atheism were to be conclusively disproven."

Atheism is a position. You can be an atheist whether you have evidence or not, much like you can be Pro or Con on a debate here whether you have evidence or not.

"for someone to be a Atheist they need to have proof and Evidence that they are a Atheist"

The evidence that someone is an atheist is that they say 'I am an atheist.'

"but Paddy you make that very clear when you said this to me I cannot prove that atheism is 'accurate and correct'."

No, I can't prove that atheism is correct, but atheism still exists.
Debate Round No. 3
Dale.G

Pro

But Paddy I can boast and say because you have no proof and evidence that atheism is accurate and correct thus therefore you cannot be a atheist no one can be a atheist why because Atheism has no proof and evidence of being real and yet you Atheist cry about wanting proof that God is real when Atheist cannot disprove God the one of the reasons why Atheism is not accurate and correct is because Atheist have never disproved God that is why no one can be 100 atheist

No, I can't prove that atheism is correct, but atheism still exists.

Paddy if you cannot prove that atheism is correct then you cannot boast about atheism still exists why because Atheism is madness atheism is a men made thing that has no real proof and evidence of being real hahahahahahhahahahahhahahahhahahahahhahaha atheism is one way of conning people into being fearful of not living forever but atheism cannot say that why because atheism has never being proven to be 100 percent accurate and correct Paddy you have failed to provide proof and evidence for atheism being real paddy you have put a big smile on my face by not providing proof and evidence that atheism is accurate and correct
DeusMortisEst

Con

I want you to answer this one question: Can someone be a theist without being able to prove the existence of god?
I want a simple yes or no, and nothing else.

"Atheist have never disproved God that is why no one can be 100 atheist"

Nobody has ever conclusively disproven the existence of Bigfoot, do you also wish to propose that Bigfoot must exist because it hasn't been disproven?

Someone can disbelieve in something whether it is disproven or not, as I have explained several times.

"atheism is a men made thing that has no real proof and evidence of being real "

As I have said several times, atheism is real. I am an atheist, therefore it is real.

Atheism isn't, strictly speaking, a man made thing. It is just skepticism of a certain proposition. Skepticism is a natural mental function. The definition of atheism is man made, the word is man made, but the position itself isn't.

" atheism is one way of conning people into being fearful of not living forever "

I would have to disagree. I am an atheist and I am not frightened of death. Most, if not all, atheists I know have no significant fear of death. Theists are the ones who fear death.

" you have failed to provide proof and evidence for atheism being real"

But atheism is real. If it wasn't you wouldn't be arguing with me.

"you have put a big smile on my face by not providing proof and evidence that atheism is accurate and correct"

And you have put a smile on my face by consistently providing proof that you are absolutely clueless about your own debate topic...
Debate Round No. 4
Dale.G

Pro

Paddy where is your proof and evidence for u disproving God

is u Paddy say no u got no evidence that u cannot disprove God then u cannot disprove God thus u cannot be a Atheist because u cannot disprove God that is why on one can be a Atheist a Theist is a Theist define what Theist means Paddy

to the voters out there Paddy has failed to provide proof and evidence that atheism is accurate and correct

paddy is not a atheist why because paddy dose not have any proof and evidence that atheism is accurate and correct Paddy has shown that on one can be a atheist just by saying I cannot prove that atheism is 'accurate and correct'

thus Atheism is madness Atheism being defeated,

Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy :)
DeusMortisEst

Con

You don't have to be able to disprove god to be an atheist, any more than you have to be able to prove god to be a theist.

I don't see how I've shown that one cannot be an atheist simply because I can't provide proof of the non-existence of something.
That isn't how disproving something works. The person making the proposition presents evidence for their proposition, and the person rejecting the proposition attempts to refute it. I asked you all the way back in round one to provide some evidence for your proposition and you ignored my request.

I already explained to you why the phrase 'atheism is madness' is inaccurate.

Please stop saying checkmate all the time. You don't win the debate simply by declaring yourself the winner.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Loathomar 4 years ago
Loathomar
When it comes to proof it is odd the theist want to change the rules for God. There is a general rule the no evidence makes people believe in the lack of something. If I said there are no giant flying dragons in the world because there is no evidence for them, you would have to be insane to say, "No, you must prove there is no giant flying dragons in the world for me to believe there are no giant flying dragons in the world". It is impossible to prove there is no giant flying dragons in the world, therefore your belief that there is no giant flying dragons in the world is valid. This is not reasonable or logical.
Posted by Aceviper2011 4 years ago
Aceviper2011
wow i just check that out, who is he, and how old is he, he wants all to hear but when it comes down to him to hear he bans. He is delusional in religion badly.
Posted by Aceviper2011 4 years ago
Aceviper2011
Oh ok I was just asking because of dales debate history, i was not trying to start any problems. just wanted to make sure. I apoligize if i offended anyone.
Posted by Aceviper2011 4 years ago
Aceviper2011
Oh ok I was just asking because of dales debate history, i was not trying to start any problems. just wanted to make sure. I apoligize if i offended anyone.
Posted by CIIReligion 4 years ago
CIIReligion
Aceviper2011, I can assure you that PRO & CON are not the same person. I have dealt with Dale G. on FB and he got me banned for 30 days for telling him to stop posting on my page. DuesMortisEst is an Atheist and I talk with him all the time.

If you want to see how idiotic Dale really is, check out his FB group: https://www.facebook.com...
Posted by Aceviper2011 4 years ago
Aceviper2011
and now I could be talking to the same person, that runs both pro and con, a person who just debates himself, so when in my debate if i see the con who is not on christianity side votes for the pro on my debate then ill know the truth about these two profiles. good luck in this debate its a good debate.
Posted by Aceviper2011 4 years ago
Aceviper2011
Wait DeusMortisEst before you put up another arguement, why not flip it on him. you see use an example, such as christianity, catholics, ect. basically use religion. Just flip it on him, for an example instead of atheism ask a question such as christianity has no proof and evidence that christianity is accurate and correct.
for example: the bible its not correct, God with out evidence of a actual god only hear say that makes it not correct. The way they act after church, making christianity not correct. With out proof and evidence christianity is not correct, its just like what is said about atheism. when atheism, is just a position, just as republican and democrates there position on what they believe.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by ModusTollens 3 years ago
ModusTollens
Dale.GDeusMortisEstTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: The CARM claim is stupid, dishonest, and poorly put together. Dale.G failed to grasp Con's argument on any level so far as I could tell.
Vote Placed by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
Dale.GDeusMortisEstTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's S&G is so bad that I often can't tell what he's trying to say.
Vote Placed by JasonGlenn 4 years ago
JasonGlenn
Dale.GDeusMortisEstTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Atheist hold the "default position" requiring the religious believer to prove their claims. It's unfair of the believer to shift the BOP unresolved. And,, Dale lost all consideration when he states, "Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy Checkmate Paddy :)." This is not a game Dale and your immaturity will not be tolerated.
Vote Placed by derkcloud 4 years ago
derkcloud
Dale.GDeusMortisEstTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed on all parts. S&G was atrocious, and the argument was laughable. Not to mention the very unbecoming "Checkmate" barrage, which is why conduct points go to Con.
Vote Placed by minstrel 4 years ago
minstrel
Dale.GDeusMortisEstTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Really Dale.G???Really??
Vote Placed by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
Dale.GDeusMortisEstTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Dale.G? I second rowsdower. Now I will go read the debate.. yup, typical. Con, next time please present a source, any source, so we can fairly award you that point as well. :p
Vote Placed by rowsdower 4 years ago
rowsdower
Dale.GDeusMortisEstTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro seems to think that repeating the same baseless assertion ad nuaseum will help prove his point. Also please stop with the 'me quote/' nonsense.
Vote Placed by Aceviper2011 4 years ago
Aceviper2011
Dale.GDeusMortisEstTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did ask pro to show proof, and con is right its a position, just like when you see a person and talk ask him does he believe in a god and he goes I do not know of a god or understand what your asking, you would basically call him a athiesm, not because he believes, he just never heard of god before.
Vote Placed by DeFool 4 years ago
DeFool
Dale.GDeusMortisEstTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Were Con to have presented a single source, I might have awarded him a full-7. This pair of debaters are on the verge of becoming a traveling side-show.
Vote Placed by Jarhyn 4 years ago
Jarhyn
Dale.GDeusMortisEstTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: And Dale has again wasted our time with bad grammar, unsourced arguments, bald assertion, and logically invalid declarations. 7 points to CON.