The Instigator
GodSands
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
Bricheze
Con (against)
Winning
123 Points

Gravity does not exist.

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
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: 12/7/2008 Category: Education
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,897 times Debate No: 6172
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (38)
Votes (20)

 

GodSands

Pro

I an not see the force gavity seems to have on life, where is this phyical object, there is no hand in the sky bringing things together. Everything is floating and had a target place where it should belong, it may seem there is gravity but there isnt any.

Why arnt all thing stuck together, with o spaces inbetween? There is no God because if there were then He would have made gravity so we wouldnt have to use flight to reach places like the moon. gravity is a belief not a law of science.
Bricheze

Con

This is clearly ridiculous. Gravity works on the basis of 'what goes up, must come down' because we are sitting on a very large planet, that pulls smaller things towards it. Without the concept of gravity, everything would just float around, and a gustof wind would blow your house away. Everything would essentially be weightless. Just as my opponent has asked me a question I would like to ask him; if gravity doesn't exist, why do I have weight? Why am I not floating around right now?

Why ar[e]nt all thing[s] stuck together, with [n]o spaces inbetween?

I'm assuming that's what you meant, if not please notify me.

The answer to this question lies in the size of the earth. If the earth was 3 times heavier, it's gravitational pull would be 3 times harder, and we would weigh 3 times more. That is why on the moon we seem 'weightless' because the moon is so much smaller the gravitational pull is greatly decreased. Because of the earths mass we aren't pulled to earth to the point that it smashes us to it; just to the point where is holds us down. I would like to ask another question:

If the the theory of gravity doesn't exist, why do we weigh less on the moon?

I would like to remind my opponent that his responsibilty for being on the 'Pro' side of the debate doesn't stand at decreasing the belief in gravity to a point where it shouldn't be a law. It stands at proving that gravity could not be real at all. As that is what's meant in the title of this debate which is: 'Gravity does not exist.'
Debate Round No. 1
GodSands

Pro

I cempetely agree 100% that gavity exists, sorry for the wastful time i gave you, i can not argue back to your response. I purposely did this so that evolutionist can see why people cant argue back to correct and true laws of science. Ridiculous is the perfect word used to desribe the argument agaist gravity. But we can debate agaist evolution with the people who believe in it having differculty responding back. I would also have a hard time responding back to this too with out lying. Evolution simple isn't true. My point proven.
Bricheze

Con

I really do not enjoy having to take the time to make an argument in this debate; for the sake of yourself in another debate. I think it is fairly rude. So please continue to argue, for otherwise my time will have gone to waste.
Debate Round No. 2
GodSands

Pro

Right your point is accepted, and now i have a challenge to disprove gravity. I actually was trying to disprove gravity, to this debate is vaild. I just cant. If i was to say if i had a object a size of a tennis ball and was as heavy as 1000 suns what would happen then, would the earth spin around a tennis ball? If gavity exists then why are the galixes moving further apart? And what the heck does f=ma mean that doesnt prove gravity. And if gravity exists the why doesnt earth just go into the sun whats the other force stopping the earth moving towards the sun.

You cant prove gravity because you cant see it.
Bricheze

Con

Actually, as con it is not my job to disprove gravity as a whole. But to disprove the arguments you have brought forward; to a point where readers can doubt that gravity doesn't exist. Which, obviously they do. So I believe my job here is finished.
Debate Round No. 3
38 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by GodSands 7 years ago
GodSands
I was comparing it to evolution, since I have no found belief in theory, you can see the effects of gravity, and likewise from a evolutionary perspective you can see the obvious effects of evolution. However there is always another side to a page. Creationism, that my firm belief. It is all and well believing in evolution, but isn't it a faith? Based on what you sense you know of evolution, but creationism is based on God who you do not sense. If you learn about empiriclism in philosophy, you will find out that in indirect realism, what you sense maybe all make belief. Evolution has ofcourse 'evolved' our five 'trust worthy' senses. Right?
Posted by atheistman 7 years ago
atheistman
Then why debate it?
Posted by GodSands 7 years ago
GodSands
No I am not serious. Gravity is a scientific theory because you can see its effects. I hate when people compare the wind, gravity or any other invisible force or thing to God's existence.
Posted by atheistman 7 years ago
atheistman
GodSands, are you serious? You seem like you're an atheist parodying Christians.
Posted by GodSands 7 years ago
GodSands
A science that no one can sence isn't a science.
Posted by ournamestoolong 7 years ago
ournamestoolong
"Cell theory
Quantum entanglement
Copenhagen interpretation
Germ theory
Evolution"

All examples of science you cannot sense.
Posted by GodSands 7 years ago
GodSands
Done, we have just proved that evolution is not science.
Posted by ournamestoolong 7 years ago
ournamestoolong
I know.It is an example of a theory you cannot sense.
Posted by GodSands 7 years ago
GodSands
To sense evolution, with a 6th sense your would have to live for millions and millions of years, which makes not sense. Since all you need to sense the world around us is our 5 sense, which we have. Therefore making evolution non-scientific yet abstract.
Posted by GodSands 7 years ago
GodSands
Oh right yeah, more than feel though, but sense.
20 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by redbrave70 7 years ago
redbrave70
GodSandsBrichezeTied
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 Vi_Veri 7 years ago
Vi_Veri
GodSandsBrichezeTied
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 Volkov 7 years ago
Volkov
GodSandsBrichezeTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
GodSandsBrichezeTied
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 Mangani 8 years ago
Mangani
GodSandsBrichezeTied
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 sydnerella 8 years ago
sydnerella
GodSandsBrichezeTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by Metz 8 years ago
Metz
GodSandsBrichezeTied
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 8 years ago
SixSigma
GodSandsBrichezeTied
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 mecap 8 years ago
mecap
GodSandsBrichezeTied
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 DeadLeaves93 8 years ago
DeadLeaves93
GodSandsBrichezeTied
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