The Instigator
PwningEinstein
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
APhysicist
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

The Big Bang may have occured

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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 2 votes the winner is...
PwningEinstein
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/15/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 561 times Debate No: 42411
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

PwningEinstein

Pro

Rules:

1) Con will argue in favor of the resolution that the Big Bang did not occur, as its mainpoints may not be inherent from a religious standpoint, or scientific facts.

2) No trolling.

3) Con shall type "No arguments shall be made as agreed upon" at round 4.

Failure to follow these rules will result in a 7 point forfeiture.
APhysicist

Con

how is earth orbitting the sun? that doesnt just suddenly happen in a big bang
Debate Round No. 1
PwningEinstein

Pro

Rebuttals:

"how is earth orbitting the sun? that doesnt just suddenly happen in a big bang"

The Earth is compelled to orbit the Sun at the same distance away from the Sun because the Sun's gravitational pull is pulling Earth inwards. However, its rotation compensates, in which it pulls itself outward.
APhysicist

Con


Newton's second law is not true because an airplane is faster than a car, while an airplane has more inertia and mass!

Debate Round No. 2
PwningEinstein

Pro

Rebuttals:

"Newton's second law is not true because an airplane is faster than a car, while an airplane has more inertia and mass!"

According to Newton's second law of physics[1], the net force has to be in proportion to, and in the same direction as, the object acted upon.

In other words, the net force a car is acted upon is weaker than the net force an airplane is acted upon.

Also, why did you change the subject?

Sources:

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...'s_laws_of_motion
APhysicist

Con


Also, in an environment without friction you would have this spinning dot going so fast it would then explode. If this happened, then all of the particles and matter being expelled from this "spinning dot" would all have to spin in the same direction as the dot they exploded from.


This is a known law of science, which those who believe in Evolution cannot do away with. It is known as the Conservation of angular momentum.



This matter which is said to have created the planets would all need to spin in the same direction as the object it came from.




So therefore, all of the planets should be spinning in the same direction.


However two of them are not. Venus and Uranus spin backwards.



Some planets even have moons that not only spin backwards, but travel backward around their planets.


Debate Round No. 3
PwningEinstein

Pro

Rebuttals:

"Also, in an environment without friction you would have this spinning dot going so fast it would then explode. If this happened, then all of the particles and matter being expelled from this "spinning dot" would all have to spin in the same direction as the dot they exploded from.

This is a known law of science, which those who believe in Evolution cannot do away with. It is known as the Conservation of angular momentum."

People do so differently, but I will assume that this is one of the mainpoints.

Yes, indeed. According to the laws of physics (Conservation of angular momentum[1], in particular), especially in an environment without friction, when a piece comes off a spinning object, that piece must spin in the same direction.

And you assume that the spinning dot span in this direction:



However, some do not. Venus and Uranus spin backwards.



However, that is not what happened.

Asteroids came flying out after the cataclysmic explosion due to the extreme density. The asteroids span in the same direction.

Asteroids go through a process where they fuse, forming stars, etc.

However, when so happens, they no longer spin, thus not violating the laws of conservation of angular momentum. If any piece spins, it must come off the formation.

"Some planets even have moons that not only spin backwards, but travel backward around their planets."

The planets, stars, etc. did not come out right after the cataclysmic explosion. They were formed.

The Earth, for instance, is compelled to orbit the Sun in the same distance because the Sun's gravitational pull is pulling it towards its center. However, the Earth's rotation compensates. It's rotation pulls it outward.

Sources:

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
APhysicist

Con

"No arguments shall be made as agreed upon"
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by gordonjames 3 years ago
gordonjames
It would have been good if PRO had stated his position so CON could refute it.
It would have been good if PRO had stated a case and then stayed on track.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by gordonjames 3 years ago
gordonjames
PwningEinsteinAPhysicistTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: S&G - Pro more often used sentences with punctuation and proper format. Because PRO had the BOP it was his job to put forward arguments. He failed to do this. Con asked (a slightly irrelevant) question and PRO got distracted and failed to make a case for his position. Again in round 2 Con asked (a slightly irrelevant) question and PRO got distracted and failed to make a case for his position. He noticed that CON changed the subject, but he did not put forth any arguments for his position. Sources could almost go to PRO for his 2 wikipedia references, but neither had anything to do with the big bang.
Vote Placed by AndrewB686 3 years ago
AndrewB686
PwningEinsteinAPhysicistTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Not a very good debate. Con had weak arguments that didn't directly pertain to the topic and blatantly denied Newton's second law of physics. This didn't correlate to the subject whatsoever, therefore his only arguments that shall be accepted were made in the last round, very poor and simplistic ones at that. Continuously changing fonts was quite annoying, therefore con loses conduct points.