The Instigator
CodyLTJames
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points
The Contender
Jomapin
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Is Bin Laden dead?

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 1 vote the winner is...
CodyLTJames
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/17/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 787 times Debate No: 60579
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (18)
Votes (1)

 

CodyLTJames

Con

I believe he isn't. My opponent will likewise debate the opposite. First round is for acceptance.
Jomapin

Pro

The first round is for acceptance.

Best of luck to my opponent.
Debate Round No. 1
CodyLTJames

Con

I believe Bin Laden is still alive. Due to the lack of physical evidence there is absolutely no proof he is dead. The FOIA seems to have been circumvented throughout the whole thing. Not to mention Bin Laden being buried at sea.
Jomapin

Pro

Jomapin forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
CodyLTJames

Con

CodyLTJames forfeited this round.
Jomapin

Pro

Jomapin forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
CodyLTJames

Con

CodyLTJames forfeited this round.
Jomapin

Pro

Jomapin forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
CodyLTJames

Con

CodyLTJames forfeited this round.
Jomapin

Pro

he is dead
Debate Round No. 5
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ZenoCitium 3 years ago
ZenoCitium
@Bennet: Yes, you nailed it and Cody's case is based completely on evidentialism. He is the ultimate skeptic but only when it suits his ideology. For instance, I could ask Cody to provide the same level of evidence that he requires to prove that Bin Laden was killed to prove that he was ever born in the first place and he'd be up sh!ts creek.
Posted by Bennett91 3 years ago
Bennett91
@Zeno Isn't that the plight of the ultimate skeptic? We can never truly know something. There are debaters and forums talking about whether or not Australia exists. One could argue that all evidence is an elaborate ruse designed to fool us. Of course this leads us to madness. If everything is a lie then what is the truth? and how can we know that that too is not a ruse?
Posted by ZenoCitium 3 years ago
ZenoCitium
@Bennett Yes, unfortunately I don't see Cody offering up anything of substance any time in the near future. I do, respectfully disagree however. There is proof that he once lived. Therfore the truth is that he is living until we have evidence that he is no longer living. Compared to the theists, we have no proof that God exists so therefore he remains non-existing until we have proof that he exists. I think the issue with Cody's resolution is similar to the critisim that evidentialism gets. Is the evidence we have available to us ever going to be completely and untterly unfalliable or will there always be at least a little bit of uncertainty and skepticism when interrogated thouroughly ? Also, Cody and other evidentialists only subject certain resolutions to this ultimate burden of proof requirement. He certainly doesn't require substantiated proof that say the duckbill platypus exists. Sure, you can read about them in books but the theists have their holy books. Sure others claim to see them in person but the theists have their miracles and apostles and so forth.
Posted by Bennett91 3 years ago
Bennett91
@Zeno: This is the comment section, so it's not hijacking. Besides it doesn't look like there's going to be a debate anyways, we might as well make the best of it. Cody wasn't providing evidence. His whole argument to me seems to be "bin Laden still exists because you can't prove he doesn't." similar to the argument of theists for God. When it comes to the theist vs. atheist debate the evidence presented by theists is subjective compared to the definitive evidence of bin Laden's death.
Posted by ZenoCitium 3 years ago
ZenoCitium
@Bennett: Funny thing is I thought Cody's thought process was more like an atheist's. He applies evidentialism exclusively when it fits his ideology. I don't mean to hijack the debate but just thought that was funny.
Posted by Bennett91 3 years ago
Bennett91
Even Al Qaeda admits bin Laden is dead [1]. There is no logical reason for this unless it's true. Bin Laden being alive would be much better propaganda than admitting he's dead.

http://www.aljazeera.com...
Posted by Bennett91 3 years ago
Bennett91
Cody has nothing, he's just arguing absence of evidence. He has no evidence to prove his position. He makes the same fallacy the religious people make when they claim God exists w/o evidence.
Posted by ZenoCitium 3 years ago
ZenoCitium
There is evidence, you're just being ignorant. They painted his compound's walls with his brain matter. Get over it and move on to a topic that matters.
Posted by CodyLTJames 3 years ago
CodyLTJames
and you dont know photos were released if they werent to the public. under the foia they should have
Posted by CodyLTJames 3 years ago
CodyLTJames
this is a debate whether or not hes . not if there is evidence. i have no problem with my opponent using believable conspirocy theories. ur just mad cuz im discussing something that tarnishes americas biggest accomplishment. its a total farce
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
CodyLTJamesJomapinTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't meet BOP. Con observes there is no proof, and Pro provides none. What a lame debate.