The Instigator
Akhenaten
Pro (for)
The Contender
Cobalt
Con (against)

Germ theory is false

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
Akhenaten has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/8/2017 Category: Science
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 310 times Debate No: 102495
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Akhenaten

Pro

Looks like that Erold has done a bolter. Anybody what to take over?

1. Germ Theory has never been proven to be a valid theory. It was only accepted because it was a way of making money out of gullible people. Money talks, so it was accepted and a huge pharmaceutical industry has since flourished to cater for this pathetic theory.


2. Luis Pasteur was a fraud and a hustler who married the rector's daughter and became a famous scientist by stealing all the experiments of other scientists. Thus, he was similar to Einstien in that he was dull and stupid in science but was clever in decieving people. Thus, both Pasteur and Einstein were both thieving frauds who stole all their ideas from other people.

3. Antoine Bechamp was the real expert on Germ Theory. But his theory differed from Pasteur in that he stated that "germs are the result of a disease and are not the cause of it"

4. Prior to agriculture, there was no disease. Agricultural products are the cause of 98% of all diseases. These products include sugar, grain and dairy. The other 2% are caused by dangerous chemicals such as chlorine, bromine and flourine. These chemicals are known as halogens which cause a disruption of the human hormone system. The hormone system is an iodine based system which is vulneable to disruption by rogue halogens as listed above.

5. When Germ Theory was formulated nobody knew anything about hormones, gut bacteria and leaky gut syndrome. Thus, Germ Theory is a totally moronic theory which disregards all knowledge of how hormones work; how the gut leaks when agrivated by grain products and how bacteria enter the blood stream internally instead of externally. Thus, the internal leakage of bacteria is a more logical explanation of disease than the exterior invasion model of disease. Therefore, Germ Theory is false because it assumes that the germs come from exterior sources.

6. Germ Theory is illogical. How do germs know when to attack humans? Germs have no legs to attack with, no brains to think with, no eyes to see with. Thus, they are conpletely incapable of even finding anything to attack in the first place. Note - The word "attack" is used repeatedly by the medical fraterity, so don't try to deny that this word is ever used.
Cobalt

Con

I'll first thank the opponent for creating this debate. Thanks.

The opponent didn't specify any round structure here, so I'm not sure whether he expects me to immediately present my arguments or simply accept the debate. As a result, this round I'll attempt to do something in between. I'll briefly address each point the opponent brought up, frame it as relevant or irrelevant to this debate, and finally address areas I'm particularly interested in my opponent talking about when he gives his full opening arguments.

We'll begin.

Opening Statement/Argument Classification

I'll simply address each statement by the number the opponent labels them.

1. This is what we'll be discussing in this debate.

2. It is possible that Louis Pasteur was a fraud/bad scientist, but this has little to do with whether Germ Theory is true. I'd suggest we stick to examining the evidence and minimize ad hominem arguments.

3. This statement is interesting and I'd like the opponent to expand upon what this means in his opening arguments.

4. Number 4 is interesting and certainly relevant. I'd ask that my opponent includes evidence that disease did not exist prior to agriculture and evidence suggesting that agricultural products cause ~98% of disease.

5. This statement seems to neglect the logical possibility that germs can come from both internal and external sources. I'd ask the opponent to reformulate this argument to account for that possibility.

6. This statement is actually a question; one I'll address next round in my opening arguments.

Summary

I've presented these opening remarks as I did because I hope it will help focus the debate. We're sitting on a 6,000 character limit, so it's important to be specific about what it is we're debating.

As a summary, I request the opponent presents scientific evidence that Germ Theory isn't valid. (Valid meaning likely to be true, I suppose.) Based upon his opening statements, his opening arguments should at least include:

a) evidence that disease didn't exist prior to the advent of agriculture,
b) evidence that agriculture is responsible for ~98% of disease,
c) evidence that germs don't enter the body via external sources

I thank the opponent for his time and I look forward to his opening arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Akhenaten 8 months ago
Akhenaten
This debate is just a duplicate that was generated by a faulty system. I didn't even know that this debate was running. As for the rating system - It is only a measure of a persons lack of morality and ability to punch below the belt. Thus, the higher the ELO rating. The lower the morality. lol! I bet you have a high rating! lol!
Posted by Cobalt 8 months ago
Cobalt
If I remember correctly, winning against someone with a sufficiently low ELO can actually lower your own, despite the win. I didn't realize until after accepting that my opponent has an ELO of 1,000, which I think is the lower limit. Perhaps it's best that this was forfeited, as the debate will now forever hang in limbo since Juggle's system doesn't know what to do with forfeited rounds anymore.
Posted by kylet357 8 months ago
kylet357
Cobalt, I recommend not continuing this debate further. Akhenaten has a history of merely asserting his claims without actually proving them, just repeatedly saying "I'm right, you're wrong". And he does this on the most bizarre topics as well.
Posted by kylet357 8 months ago
kylet357
Cobalt, I recommend not continuing this debate further. Akhenaten has a history of merely asserting his claims without actually proving them, just repeatedly saying "I'm right, you're wrong". And he does this on the most bizarre topics as well.
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.