The Instigator
legodude1234
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
AizenSousuke
Con (against)
Winning
19 Points

Is the intelligents of scientist found to be valid information on the facts on the real world

Do you like this debate?NoYes-3
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 3 votes the winner is...
AizenSousuke
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/9/2014 Category: Cars
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 673 times Debate No: 45513
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

legodude1234

Pro

No think about science, Scientist know everything
AizenSousuke

Con

The way I have understood this debate, the Pro is arguing that scientific avidence should always be assumed to be fact, while the Con argues that scientificly-derived conclusions can be incorrect.

Point 1: The difinition of the scientific method
A true scientist never thinks of anything to be 100% fact. Even the thought of the world existing is not nesseccarily true. It is in fact a concievable idea that nothing "exists" (Sources 1 & 2).

Basically, the scientific method is to always question and never to assume. Thinking that such a thing as "absolute fact" exists is beyond foolish in the eyes of science.

Point 2: It is not possible for scientists to "know everything"
Scientists, as far as we know, are all humans. Humans are inherently limmited creatures. It is impossible for any person or group of people to have an infitine knowledge capable of "knowing everything". In order for anyone, not even just scientists, to know everything, they would have to ascend to the level of an omniscient god. Such an occurance is just too unlikely.

Point 3: Science is made by humans
Humans are imperfect and make mistakes. Scientists are no exception. Although scientists strive to continuosly uncover truths and discover new things, they are not always correct and may come to false conclusions even for reasons of accidentally innacurate measurements. This is why they constantly check each other's work and try to reproduce experiments as much as possible before determining it to be right. And even after all this checking, some scientific theories have been proven wrong at a much later date due to advances in technology.

For these reasons, vote CON

Sources:
1: http://www.telegraph.co.uk...
2: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...
Debate Round No. 1
legodude1234

Pro

legodude1234 forfeited this round.
AizenSousuke

Con

Pro surrendered. Con arguments stand.
Vote Con
Debate Round No. 2
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by sontesenne05 2 years ago
sontesenne05
I think some are conspiracy's and beliefs
Posted by legodude1234 3 years ago
legodude1234
@watchmoket this is about science proving many things that can be true in the real world. The other side says scientific facts are not always true
Posted by legodude1234 3 years ago
legodude1234
So what is that against the law?? What is your business why are you commanding people who they can debate with and how they make an account your just so worried about others please stop your idiotic ness because you don't know anything about hard drives and super intelligent facts
Posted by Watchemoket 3 years ago
Watchemoket
I have no idea what it is that you propose to debate. It is the "cars" category, but seems to be focused on whether science can determine what facts about the real world are correct. Please clarify what it is that you want to debate.
Posted by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
You're not 15 years old...
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years ago
Krazzy_Player
legodude1234AizenSousukeTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Better arguments by Con. Sources are only used by Con. Conduct points as Pro forfeited and the debate never actually started at all.
Vote Placed by Defro 3 years ago
Defro
legodude1234AizenSousukeTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Poor conduct on Pro's part because both the title and his statement in round 1 was very difficult to understand. While Con made a few grammar mistakes, it dis not in any way undermine what he was trying to say. Pro's spelling errors made the debate confusing. Pro also forfeited.
Vote Placed by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
legodude1234AizenSousukeTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides made few mistakes in regards to Grammar. Con participated, which contributed to his victory. Con used sources, and con produced good arguments.