The Instigator
Wayne
Con (against)
Winning
42 Points
The Contender
Im_always_right
Pro (for)
Losing
18 Points

Ghosts and Spirits' Existence

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
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: 10/3/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,777 times Debate No: 5613
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (21)
Votes (10)

 

Wayne

Con

I met people who would strongly insist that ghosts and spirits exist, some even say they can "communicate" with these entities.

Stance: Ghosts and spirits exist in our universe.

I am arguing for the con side, and the pro side would have to give evidence or logical reasoning that would demonstrate why one should affirm the stance.
Im_always_right

Pro

I thank my opponent for posting this nice fun debate.

I would like to post a link that tells how ghosts really exist, but not in the sense most people think:

http://www.ghosthaunts.com...

Which proves that ghosts do in fact exist.
Debate Round No. 1
Wayne

Con

I would like to start off by first thanking the user "Im_always_right" for taking this debate. I also like
to thank all the readers who may be reading this, and debate.org for making all this possible =]

Now... let's get to business...

I have read all the content presented on the web page which supposedly "proves that ghosts do in fact exist".
I have NOT, however, find any contentions for the existence of ghost contrary to what the pro side has promised.

The first three paragraphs on the page deal with definitions of "ghost" and how ghosts are described, as well as how science negates it.

The fourth paragraph has informed me of the term "Ectoplasm". Apparently, it means "the substance from which spirits and ghosts are made of" However, there is not much information beyond this. No evidence has been provided for the existence of ectoplasm.

The fifth paragraph... to put it mildly, is quite humorous. It says that "An astonishing fact is that the best details about the existence of ghost can be obtained from Garuda Purana"
The details are as follows, "people who do sins will be reborn as ghosts [...] they consume vomit, waste, cough, urine and tears" The question why these "astonishing" details are the "best" about the existence of ghost is never answered.

The final paragraph presents information that I am supposed to use against the pro side.
It basically makes the case that people who believed that have encountered ghosts may be mistaken.

So to sum up this round, the pro side has directed me to a web page, which was supposed to
prove that ghosts exist. However, I cannot find within the page, even an ATTEMPT to prove that ghosts exist.
I urge all the voters to go to the site and see for yourself. If you agree with me, vote Con!!

final note, I also urge the pro side to present evidence and contentions directly on the site.
It is easier to debate if we know the specific arguments you want to use.
Im_always_right

Pro

There are unexplainable things and many sightings of ghosts.

http://terrifyingtales.blogspot.com...

Explain that link nad these as well:

http://www.ghostsofamerica.com...

http://www.ghostsofamerica.com...

http://www.ghostsofamerica.com...

http://www.ghostsofamerica.com...

http://www.ghostsofamerica.com...

I think that is enough local tales from around the states.
Debate Round No. 2
Wayne

Con

I would like to thank the pro side for providing me with some links to stories of ghosts. Although they may be interesting stories to read, they are of no value whatsoever scientifically. It will take a lot more than ghosts stories to prove that ghosts exist, especially if the stories are found on a website that is for entertaining purposes. Anyone could submit their own story to the site and it would be published. There will be no need to provide evidence that the story really happened. In fact, it is almost a guarantee that all the stories found on the site ghostofamerica.com (which is the site 5 out of the 6 stories my opponent has provided came from) are fabricated. At the bottom of the home page, there is a disclaimer that states "the material on this site is for entertainment purposes only". It further says that all resemblances of its stories to actual people are coincidences only. Even if those stories are coming from people who genuinely believe they have encountered ghosts, one still could not take their words as evidence that ghosts exist. If I say I saw a flying spaghetti monster, no one would believe unless I show some concrete evidence. Even if I am able to provide photographs, they would need to be checked for genuineness. In science, anecdotal evidence can not prove anything. My opponent would need to provide more concrete evidence from a reliable source that ghosts exist.
Im_always_right

Pro

You did not say what proof was...eyewitnesses ARE proof. IT is nearly impossible to give proof to things that are known to exist anyway. Such as:

Black holes
GWB brain (unless that really is a myth...)
Air

and many other things....

Here is a pic:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com...

Sorry would give more but gotta go.
Debate Round No. 3
21 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by GodSands 5 years ago
GodSands
Im_aways_right, you posted some evil sites! You welcome evil spirits into your life when you get involed in that kind of thing, I would advise anyone to stop it.
Posted by Im_always_right 5 years ago
Im_always_right
I shouldn't admit it, but I have no clue either. I really had no idea how to argue it, and put dumb stuff on hoping it would work out. And it really didn't.
Posted by bored 5 years ago
bored
doesn't anyone else thing I'm_always_right did an awful job? She basically posted websites to do her work for her and they weren't even that relevant. How on earth does that translate to 11 points?
Posted by Im_always_right 6 years ago
Im_always_right
I have no clue, this is really hard to argue from a Pro's veiwpoint.
Posted by Wayne 6 years ago
Wayne
"Hmmm this debate should have been a sure win for Pro"

why?
Posted by Im_always_right 6 years ago
Im_always_right
LOL LM.

I agree with Ragnar_Rahl though.
Posted by Lightkeeper 6 years ago
Lightkeeper
Hmmm this debate should have been a sure win for Pro
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 6 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
LM, if you think ghosts are around, you shouldn't have your pants around your ankles. Unless you are gay, or the ghost is a female with a strap on who you think will reciprocate. :P
Posted by Logical-Master 6 years ago
Logical-Master
So I woke up in the middle of a night and something was sliding it's hand up my leg. I turned on the lamp and no one was there. I was really freaked out but at the same time wanted to dismiss it as having some scientific explanation. So I turned the light back off and decided to flip over and sleep face down. All the sudden, I felt something violently humping me. I turned on the lamp again and no one was there. I turned the lamp off and before I knew it I was having sex with a ghost. After that, my notions of ghosts and anal rape changed forever. True story.
Posted by Im_always_right 6 years ago
Im_always_right
George W. Bush, is his brain real? I don't think so. LOL, adding humor, and plus really not sure if such a thing does exist. Anyone know if it exists or not.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by quarterexchange 3 years ago
quarterexchange
WayneIm_always_rightTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had no arguments of their own, and Con was sane.
Vote Placed by mmgoff 3 years ago
mmgoff
WayneIm_always_rightTied
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 bored 5 years ago
bored
WayneIm_always_rightTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 blondie_smiles 5 years ago
blondie_smiles
WayneIm_always_rightTied
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:52 
Vote Placed by Im_always_right 5 years ago
Im_always_right
WayneIm_always_rightTied
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 eddietastic 6 years ago
eddietastic
WayneIm_always_rightTied
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 PoeJoe 6 years ago
PoeJoe
WayneIm_always_rightTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Vote Placed by TheSkeptic 6 years ago
TheSkeptic
WayneIm_always_rightTied
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:50 
Vote Placed by Wayne 6 years ago
Wayne
WayneIm_always_rightTied
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 Zerosmelt 6 years ago
Zerosmelt
WayneIm_always_rightTied
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