The Instigator
GodSands
Pro (for)
Losing
32 Points
The Contender
Puck
Con (against)
Winning
141 Points

Does God exist?

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/6/2008 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,242 times Debate No: 4608
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (51)
Votes (35)

 

GodSands

Pro

In the beginning there was nothing, suddenly a big bang accored, from nowhere and started life, over billions of years we crawed from the waters and became human, clere and intelagen, we look back at the accident which accored. And did it actually happened or was there God which made us with pure purpose and meaning with every man and woman worthy or life with out sin.

1 fact before you begin, for the big bang to happen, the chances would be 10 to the power of 40,000, that would be like finding the winning lotto ticket on the street every week for a 1000 year, or you could say theres less atoms in the universe that 10 to the power of 40,000. <Report this Argument
Puck

Con

"In the beginning there was nothing, suddenly a big bang accored, from nowhere and started life, over billions of years we crawed from the waters and became human, clere and intelagen, we look back at the accident which accored."

There was no point at which there was nothing. There was just the universe as a quantum object. Relativistic physics shows us that both time and space are inherent aspects of this universe i.e. they cannot occur outside of the set universe itself. Any claim of 'before' the Big Bang is pointless. There was no before. There is no 'outside time and space' it is a contradictory statement.

To call the start of the universe to present time an 'accident' is erroneous. An accident would imply intent somewhere. The fact is we know quite a lot about cosmology, biology etc. We know about the universes inflation, we know the typography of the universe, we know how the first particles condensed, we know what makes stars, how the elements of the universe formed and were distributed. We know how galaxies are created, we know how planets form. We know what is needed to form an atmosphere; we know the requirements of life to have begun on earth. We have shown how basic elements can change into organic compounds. We know how these could have given rise to basic protein strands and we have a good understanding on natural processes that lead to biological complexity.

"And did it actually happened or was there God which made us with pure purpose and meaning with every man and woman worthy or life with out sin."

The best argument we have against god, is purely that the universe functions perfectly without the need for one. An individual does not need god to have a meaningful existence. An individual's life is its own meaning. Sin is just a concept, created by man. It is a tool of a belief system, nothing more than that. Since you have used sin, I can assume you are referring to the Christian god. I will await you to confirm that however before I show you the errors inherent in that concept. Yourself I would guess do not believe in the entirety of gods man has created so far excepting one. Once you start to recognise why you reject those multitudes you may be on the way to rationalising the existence of the one remaining god you do believe in. Or if you prefer, to look at it from another angle, if you were born in Afghanistan you would be a Muslim arguing this but saying Allah was the only true god.

"1 fact before you begin, for the big bang to happen, the chances would be 10 to the power of 40,000, that would be like finding the winning lotto ticket on the street every week for a 1000 year, or you could say theres less atoms in the universe that 10 to the power of 40,000. <
To know the odds of an event occurring one would need to know how it began. We have no clear understanding of how the Big Bang first occurred. What this does not equate to, is that this necessitates god as any metaphysical poking stick to get the universe going. We have several plausible explanations of the universe beginning that need no god. Like humanity as a whole attributed weather to the acts of god through lack of knowledge, so to do such notions as 'creation' belong. At any rate the odds are entirely irrelevant; all that needs to happen is the event to occur once. If you hold that odds are the measuring stick for the likelihood of an event, god must surely raise those odds even further.
Debate Round No. 1
GodSands

Pro

Ok i would completely agree with you if you knew a define and reasonalbe way the universe begain rather than the method of an exsplotion (bing bang) firstly exsplotions are destructive, every exsplotion has been, and has made order into less order, so why does the big bang get to stand out from the rest. Its still a "exsplotion".

Im reading that your saying the universe has been here foever, but surely if the universe is growing old, that simply couldnt be true, such as the our sun will die one day, mix time with decy you get death so when the stars die out the planets will and when the stars die out the galixes will die out. Nothing i believe from this life lasts forever. In the Bible in the book of Timothy it says that the universe will grow old but you will live on. I believe our etanel salvation is the most important above anything else like our cars, houses as they will not be with you once you die.

And yes the chances of the big bang accurring is 10 to the power of 40,000 thats 1 with 40,000 zeros behind the 1 agaist 1. Theres less atoms in the universe than that number.
So ofcourse you will will be amazed by the fact, and ask for proof.

In the theory of evolution you need matter, heat and light, well we do today dont we, in the food bisuines theres food with matter exsposd to light and heat, sciencetise have relized that if evolution was true, often not too often but sometimes we should find living matter in a new, say a new jar of jam, not once has anyone descoved any live form in there food which adaped from our food, and thank goodness there hasent been, i would want i would want that, so would you? so really everyone does want evolution to happen if it could, in that case.

As we all came from a star, so sciencetists clame, including the planets, in the fist place if that is true we would still be part of the star as its gavitly is much greater than what we weigh so there would we would be made from hyrogin and fire as our own solar system is so different in the way the planets have form, like Jupiter saves us from many thousands of asriods, we as earth is so finly tuned in place that if we were 1% away from the sun we would freeze and earth wouldnt inhabbit any live and if earth was 5% closer would be die of the heat again it would be impossiable to inhabbit life. Chances of that is extemely high already and that not all, the sun is just the right size to keep us in that delicet place any bigger and we would be none existant same if it was any smaller, the uniqueness contiunes the planet Uranes has its ring faceing upwards and that is so extraorderney that astronemores say a mertreroit celided into it making it tild i know that is false. Also Jupiters gavilty pull is so great that is lowers of oncomming rocks from space missing earth. Not always but if Jupiter wasnt there, earth wouldnt be either

This all comes to show how evoltion of life is so flawed and wild that you simply cant not exsplain those perticluar happenings. With out that almost unreal chance of all this comming together. So i believe in God, yeah the Christain God which makes plenty more sense to me.
Puck

Con

"Ok i would completely agree with you if you knew a define and reasonalbe way the universe begain rather than the method of an exsplotion (bing bang) firstly exsplotions are destructive, every exsplotion has been, and has made order into less order, so why does the big bang get to stand out from the rest. Its still a "exsplotion"."

Well this should be easy then. The Big bang was a term coined by Fred Hoyle to deride the then new theory. Big Bang Theory itself does not postulate an explosion at all. The event was sudden inflation, which is very different. The universe is still expanding as you read this.

"Im reading that your saying the universe has been here foever, but surely if the universe is growing old, that simply couldnt be true, such as the our sun will die one day, mix time with decy you get death so when the stars die out the planets will and when the stars die out the galixes will die out."

Forever is a relative term in regards to the universe. We can determine the start of the universe at around 13.7 billion years ago. As time and space are both intrinsic aspects of this set universe then it naturally follows that yes, it has existed forever, because time only began when the universe began. Stars have and continue to die. Stars have their own process of 'evolution' in how they are formed and what leads to their eventual destruction. Our sun has a lifespan of around 10 billion years, however that shouldn't worry you too much as the Andromeda Galaxy is set to collide with our own in around 3 Billion years.

"In the Bible in the book of Timothy it says that the universe will grow old but you will live on. I believe our etanel salvation is the most important above anything else like our cars, houses as they will not be with you once you die."

Well the bible also said god made plants before sunlight so go figure. ;) It has lots of fun things to say.

Infanticide
Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us — he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks!
- Psalm 137:8-9

Go god!

Clearly god was a communist as well. ;)

Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbour.
- 1 Corinthians 10:24

If anyone would take your coat, let him have your shirt as well. Give to him who begs from you, and do not refuse him who would borrow from you.
- Matthew 5:40-42

There is much fun to be had with that book. It's a hoot. Here's more

Chauvinism

Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
- 1 Corinthians 14:34-35

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived, it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
- 1 Timothy 2:11-14

Well enough fun. Back to the debate.

"And yes the chances of the big bang accurring is 10 to the power of 40,000 thats 1 with 40,000 zeros behind the 1 agaist 1. Theres less atoms in the universe than that number.
So ofcourse you will will be amazed by the fact, and ask for proof."

The problem of assigning a 'probability' to an event is that it assumes the event was probabilistic in nature i.e. random chance. Maybe to you god rolling a proverbial 10/40 000 sided dice was the start of things. To the science community at large though, natural origins are not random chance.

"In the theory of evolution you need matter, heat and light, well we do today dont we, in the food bisuines theres food with matter exsposd to light and heat, sciencetise have relized that if evolution was true, often not too often but sometimes we should find living matter in a new, say a new jar of jam, not once has anyone descoved any live form in there food which adaped from our food, and thank goodness there hasent been, i would want i would want that, so would you? so really everyone does want evolution to happen if it could, in that case."

See this is what happens when people get their education from creationist you-tube videos. Abiogenesis may require heat, that's not a certainty though. Light certainly is not a requisite for life formation. In no way would any evolutionist expect some random life start occurrence in a sealed air tight jar of breakfast spread. If you are talking about the origin of organic life then the conditions in which that began on this planet were wholly different to now and any sugar based jar of spreading things. Furry fact though, mould will grow there; maybe you can try that for summer science class fun. Science is not a dirty word.

"As we all came from a star, so sciencetists clame, including the planets, in the fist place if that is true we would still be part of the star as its gavitly is much greater than what we weigh"

The mind boggles at what your teachers must be telling you. Elements were transformed in stars is maybe what you are referring to. Starting from the 2 basic elements of Hydrogen and Helium, the first massive stars formed and quickly consumed their own self. Stars process their own selves to fuel themself, which is why stars eventually die (they run out of fuel). During this process, elements are converted to heavier ones. When the star finally gives off one last big hurrah then the transformed matter is sent flying. That matter will then form the next set of stars, transform heavier elements still, and so on.

"like Jupiter saves us from many thousands of asriods..."

Yes we have live in a habitable zone. Ohhhhh I get it GOD put us there. Right. Ok. Of all species that existed around 99% are now extinct. Master planning? Well to be fair to Mars it just manages to be squeezed out of this habitable zone, almost got in but not quite. This quaintly termed 'goldilocks zone' is far from unique though and only necessary to certain life. Extrasolar habitable zones have been found, for example, 20 light years out we have Gliese 581 d, the third planet of the red dwarf star Gliese 581. Scientists have found microbes in nuclear reactors, microbes that love acid, microbes that swim in boiling-hot water. Whole ecosystems have been discovered around deep sea vents where sunlight never reaches and the emerging vent-water is hot enough to melt lead. I fear however that you are missing the whole point of biological existence. We are attuned to the required conditions for life on this planet. This planet is not attuned to us.

"This all comes to show how evoltion of life is so flawed and wild that you simply cant not exsplain those perticluar happenings. With out that almost unreal chance of all this comming together. So i believe in God, yeah the Christain God which makes plenty more sense to me."

The fact that you have yet to mention anything relating to the Theory of Evolution at all shows your deep lack of understanding. Evolution makes no claim about the existence of planets, stars, beginnings of the universe. It makes no statements on the origin of life itself. They are separate theories, separate evidences. I can see how the Christian god may make more sense to you, because your understanding of how the real world operates and what science actually says about it is deeply flawed.

Character limits are approaching so I will make it short.
1. If God exists, then he is immutable.
2. If God exists, then he is all-loving.
3. An immutable being cannot be affected by events.
4. To be all-loving, it must be possible for a being to be affected by events.
5. Hence, it is impossible for an immutable being to be all-loving (from 3 and
6. Therefore, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 5).
Debate Round No. 2
GodSands

Pro

Ok for one your saying now that the big bang wasnt a big bang at all but it inploded outwards, like a gentle exsplotion which only make live, like a gentle God which can only love, we as humans twist the bible apart with new and false theories, as the bible is around 2000 year old its stood the test of time and always will as the correctness will aply to all, yet you believe in science text books which men have written from their own exspriance. And yey science is proven wrong every day.

God made light and saw it was good, God then devided the darkness from the light. I know you dont need light to have a sun. "Barnard 68 (Dark nubula) This looming hole in space", Its a pitch black cloud as science can only desribe it as a cloud as its separates your vision from the stars behind, at -263 degrees its as cold as its dark. One of the coldest things in the universe, These cold lifess places can be half a light year wide and deep, about 2 light years in dianimetre, that, if it came to our solar system it would wipe out the light from the sun and freeze us to death. Thats what it was like before God made the stars and planets almost nothing, ands now the universe is growing old, i believe more of these dark nebulas will appear. The one i told you about is 500 light year away from us now. So God devided this darkness from the light, and as i said for the cloud to return it would be night always, and yes ofcouse night as the sun will set and make darkess because that is the way God created the solar systems, if the sun never set one half of the wold would be in darkness.

Back to evolution as i havent quite finished. As you believe in we came out the water 450 million years ago, now here my question, did we have lungs or gills. And the bird with is misaked as the missing link has a collar bone but dinosauses have not. Bone simply doesnt diserapper. If evolution did exist the bone would form. Over 10 minutes or 10 million years as a deformation is a accident in birth. So if your lucky you may get the better vesion from a bregnasy, But truely believe this is compelete flawed, as are geans and DNA is cleary past down to your mother, father and unless they had a better chance like they could fly the we will never fly, that sounded over the top, maybe because evolution is. DNA id past down from generation, sure our skin colour will change if we lived it a hotter place but that isnt evolution that called abapting to the surrounding it wont change in apparnce like a monkey to a whale, which evolutions think, becaus as i said a monkey has different DNA to a whale.

Anyone with good intelagence will be pro on the dabate agaist evolution. This would be another way of desribing the chances of evolution accouring, if hurracane swepped through a dumb yard and left the dumb yard with a bowing 747, Just like the bing bang creating order. Then evolution is true however intill that happenes im agaist evolution.

Ive talked about the planets and stars, and why they work so well like the planets are like well behaved children, and the stars are not near one another as it would cause a fight, like two adults fighting and the fact that evolution is impossiable, and how the world is so full of life when others are not, and how the plants and animals work together to make more plants and animals, but humans the one with the knowledge is the diease on the cell as well kill off the world as we kill off its cells.
Puck

Con

"Ok for one your saying now that the big bang wasnt a big bang at all but it inploded outwards, like a gentle exsplotion which only make live,"

Inploded outwards...I actually laughed a little. Implosion is the ....opposite of explosion. Expansion is not explosion. The nature of an explosion i.e. fiery ball, is not the same as the start of the universes sudden expansion. This can most clearly be seen by the typography of the universe itself which is relatively flat.

"like a gentle God which can only love, we as humans twist the bible apart with new and false theories, as the bible is around 2000 year old its stood the test of time and always will as the correctness will aply to all, yet you believe in science text books which men have written from their own exspriance. And yey science is proven wrong every day."

No the bible has not 'stood the test of time' because your judgement on the event is biased from when you make that call. The Egyptian's myths stood the test of time in their civilization too, gave rise to Greek then Roman pantheons, combined with Mesopotamian religions to amalgamate into Semitic religion and from there into Christianity. Science is not something you can prove wrong. Science is a tool for analysing the natural universe. Even besides that, the bible fails on its own merits. It is riddled with contradictions, it suffers translation errors. Any claims of 'but it's metaphorical and truth together' and such like additionally fail because there is no objective applied standard to what parts are truth or not.

"I know you dont need light to have a sun."

You are right! Shame you meant it in reverse though.

"Its a pitch black cloud as science can only desribe it as a cloud as its
separates your vision from the stars behind, at -263 degrees its as cold as its dark"

Yes a dark nebulae is an interstellar cloud with huge density, hence it blocks out the view from 'behind' it. Space on the whole is incredibly cold, nothing special there. ;)

"Thats what it was like before God made the stars and planets almost nothing, ands now the universe is growing old, i believe more of these dark nebulas will appear."

The universe was just an interstellar cloud? Dark nebulas, or any interstellar clouds do not however "appear", they form from existent material.

"The one i told you about is 500 light year away from us now. So God devided this darkness from the light, and as i said for the cloud to return it would be night always, and yes ofcouse night as the sun will set and make darkess because that is the way God created the solar systems, if the sun never set one half of the wold would be in darkness."

Apocalypse theories are always good for a laugh. So god divided the darkness, what this would mean is those clouds you speak of form those exact stars i.e. the matter in interstellar clouds is where stars and planets come from. For the cloud "to return" would necessitate the destruction of a large amount of stars, planetary bodies, galaxies etc....oh and yeah a whole lot of time, billions of years.

"if the sun never set one half of the wold would be in darkness."

The sun doesn't set, the earth rotates. Education is not a sin.

"As you believe in we came out the water 450 million years ago, now here my question, did we have lungs or gills. And the bird with is misaked as the missing link has a collar bone but dinosauses have not. Bone simply doesnt diserapper. If evolution did exist the bone would form"

You are out by about 50 million years but no matter. The first animals by necessity to emerge from the water were proto amphibians, capable of both forms. Oxygen is possibly the greatest motivator for life on this planet. As birds came AFTER dinosaurs and descended from, then if birds have a collarbone that is not an issue at all. If any species of bird can viably exist without a collar bone then there is no selection pressure to maintain it. Humans are slowly losing their tail bones, a remnant from our biological past. Aaaaaaaaaaaaah bone is disappearing, the horror of it all.

"Over 10 minutes or 10 million years as a deformation is a accident in birth. So if your lucky you may get the better vesion from a bregnasy, But truely believe this is compelete flawed, as are geans and DNA is cleary past down to your mother, father and unless they had a better chance like they could fly the we will never fly, that sounded over the top, maybe because evolution is."

Our DNA is mainly composed of remnant junk portions and here is where the majority of mutations occur. When cells copy there are errors, in the case of humans about 100 occur. Yes genes are passed down via parents. This supports Evolutionary Theory, not dissolve it. For humans to fly there would have to be the genetic capacity to do so. Evolutionary theory in no way states that all possible alternatives are inherent in any one biological species. To make this clearer for you, reptiles split into lines that led to both birds and mammals, mammals are not descended from birds.

"DNA id past down from generation, sure our skin colour will change if we lived it a hotter place but that isnt evolution that called abapting to the surrounding it wont change in apparnce like a monkey to a whale, which evolutions think, becaus as i said a monkey has different DNA to a whale."

Our skin colour may change if there is selective pressure/genetic drift. Modern society may well counter any past pressure to change skin colour simply because we survive longer, procreate easier, birth survival rate is higher. Yes a monkey has different DNA to a whale, but they both share common ancestry, hence similar DNA. Much like we share 99% of our DNA with teeny mice. Evolution does not support backwards steps. So no, a monkey will not turn into a whale because its survival would be compromised along the way. That is Evolutionary Theory again, not any evidence against it.

"if hurracane swepped through a dumb yard and left the dumb yard with a bowing 747, Just like the bing bang creating order. Then evolution is true however intill that happenes im agaist evolution."

Another creationist propaganda classic. Evolutionary Theory is NOT a random process. Drawing parallels to random occurrences just further highlights your clear ignorance on the subject as a whole.

"Ive talked about the planets and stars, and why they work so well like the planets are like well behaved children, and the stars are not near one another as it would cause a fight, like two adults fighting and the fact that evolution is impossiable, and how the world is so full of life when others are not, and how the plants and animals work together to make more plants and animals, but humans the one with the knowledge is the diease on the cell as well kill off the world as we kill off its cells."

Patronising cosmology, that is a first I will give you that much. Stars, galaxies, comets, planets, moons etc. collide frequently. Destruction is common. This earth itself has been subject to at least 3 major cosmological impacts that could have quite easily obliterated the earth/life itself. Plants and animals work wonderfully together because it favours their survival. A plant evolves a feature that takes advantage of an insect capability the plant has a better chance of survival. Harmony is only relative; if a species was to overpopulate they risk their own extinction. Introduce species and you quickly see how balance can be disrupted. Human birth frequently occurs with genetic based defects, we are afflicted with disease and degenerative processes. We are susceptible to bacteria, viruses and parasites. This is the reality of our natural origins.

So to go back, the greatest proof we have of god's inexistence is its own irrelevance. A god that is not needed is not much of a god at all. Ignorance of the natural universe is no evidence of god, though it does explain creationism. ;)
Debate Round No. 3
51 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by lovelife 6 years ago
lovelife
sexist bible.
Posted by lovelife 6 years ago
lovelife
I feel ashamed of myself.
Posted by GodSands 6 years ago
GodSands
This was my first ever debate, my spelling is awful. My arguments are now dated and easy to refute.
Posted by wrestlenrun 6 years ago
wrestlenrun
bad troll is bad
at least i hope to "god" its a troll
Posted by Puck 7 years ago
Puck
lols @ votes
Posted by GodSands 8 years ago
GodSands
why not, thats a really poor exsuse.
Posted by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
"Probably because
1) He's WUUURRROOOOONNNNGGGGG
2) He went up against Puck."

--> Hehe I meant PRO shouldn't be getting any votes.
Posted by GodSands 8 years ago
GodSands
yeah thats the most stupid thing ive heard Rezzealaux, temperture differs if it overcast or if theres a clear sky to rain and sun ray, snow, time of year because earth spins on a acses. but the moon and gravity is completely different to weather, gravitly is a force the clouds in the sky dont have any effect on the moon. Think, why has there been more uncontrolable tides in recent years, its a mathmatic fact that the moon is move away from earth. its not like the moon comes closer as it pleases and moves away when it desides to. not like the weather.
Posted by Puck 8 years ago
Puck
"refute every one of your arguments, but since I don't think that's worth my time"

lol. I saw that and thought the same thing Rezz. I will deal with it later.
Posted by Rezzealaux 8 years ago
Rezzealaux
Lrn2cosmology and physics and biology.
I would cite all the necessary videos on youtube that refute every one of your arguments, but since I don't think that's worth my time I'll just refute the one I think is just utter BS by any intelligent mind's means.

"if the earth has been around for 1.4 billion years then in 5 billion years the moon would have been 380,000 miles closer to earth. according to mathmatics. as the moon does move 2 inchs a year."

CREATIONIST LOGIC:
It was one degree colder yesterday.
Which would mean that a year ago, it was 365 degrees colder.
Ergo life could not have existed before last year.

LOGIC:
It was one degree colder yesterday.
It really doesn't say anything about the weather last year,
Or the weather from four years ago, or four billion years ago.

GG.
35 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by wrestlenrun 6 years ago
wrestlenrun
GodSandsPuckTied
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 
Vote Placed by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
GodSandsPuckTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:70 
Vote Placed by rawrxqueen 7 years ago
rawrxqueen
GodSandsPuckTied
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 
Vote Placed by patsox834 7 years ago
patsox834
GodSandsPuckTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
GodSandsPuckTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by s0m31john 7 years ago
s0m31john
GodSandsPuckTied
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 
Vote Placed by Metz 7 years ago
Metz
GodSandsPuckTied
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 
Vote Placed by bigg3r_trigg3r 7 years ago
bigg3r_trigg3r
GodSandsPuckTied
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 
Vote Placed by SixSigma 7 years ago
SixSigma
GodSandsPuckTied
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 
Vote Placed by jjmd280 7 years ago
jjmd280
GodSandsPuckTied
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