The Instigator
kdog519
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
imabench
Pro (for)
Winning
57 Points

The big bang theory is not real

Do you like this debate?NoYes-4
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 12 votes the winner is...
imabench
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/29/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,273 times Debate No: 74447
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (22)
Votes (12)

 

kdog519

Con

JUST Saying. It's pretty ridiculous.
imabench

Pro

Just gonna go ahead and snipe this for the sake of getting it out of the 'Open Challenges' category.

The Big Bang theory is indeed real, it is a comedy tv show that airs on CBS and is currently in its 8th season:
http://www.cbs.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

The show focuses around a cast of 5 characters named Penny, Sheldon, Raj, Leonard, and Howard, all of whom are real life actors who are 'real'. Many of them have also participated in other projects outside of the Big Bang Theory, which testifies to the fact that they are indeed 'real'

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

I have met the minimal burden of proof to show that The Big Bang Theory is indeed a real TV show, Con on the other hand has astoundingly failed to produce even a single coherent counter-argument, or even provide a single source indicating that her position could even possibly be true. Therefore, you should vote con on all counts.

#GetTrolled
Debate Round No. 1
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
You guys are being idiots for removing a 1 point vote in a debate that the side that should be legitimately losing has a 63 point lead. Also those are like ghetto dictionaries. I'm going to the library to look this up in a respectable dictionary tomorrow. "Gonna" just sounds wrong .
Posted by bluesteel 2 years ago
bluesteel
=====================================================
>Reported vote: Wylted // Moderator action: Removed<

1 point to Con (conduct). Reasons for voting decision: Pro used the word "gonna" which is not in the dictionary.

[*Reason for removal*] C'mon, this is just stupid. "Gonna" is not a misspelled word, and regardless, a single spelling error is not enough for S&G. Also, "gonna" is in the dictionary, e.g. Google's dictionary and Webster's Learner's Dictionary.
======================================================
Posted by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
@Yassine, the scientific Big Bang theory doesn't really have that many predictions on the Planck epoch, its primary prediction is the large-scale expansive evolution of the universe, which was initially infinitesimally small. The BGV theorem via. red shifts and the homogeneous distribution of thermal CMB radiation (especially as measured last year in the form of a magnetic B-mode at 150 GHz) virtually prove the Big Bang.
Posted by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
Yeah, read my RFD.
Posted by Varrack 2 years ago
Varrack
Pro is supposed to be arguing that it's not real...that's the resolution.
Posted by Chaosism 2 years ago
Chaosism
@rayhaan779

That is called "Infinite Regress". If one is arguing for a being to be the "original cause" or "mover", then one must answer why that being doesn't need a creator. If one answers with, "this being is eternal and was always there", then you have just admitted that something *can* exist without being caused. To argue that *only* this being can possess this trait is called special pleading, which is a logical fallacy.

Furthermore, the conditions prior to the Big Bang would be nothing like anything we have experienced within our universe, and are unknown at this point. Just because it is not known doesn't mean that there was "nothing" before it.
Posted by rayhaan779 2 years ago
rayhaan779
@SNP1 The premise being that, every motion must be caused by another motion, and the earlier motion must in turn be a result of another motion and so on. The conclusion thus follows that there must be an initial prime-mover, a mover that could cause motion without any other mover. We believe this infinite mover to be God. Logically it does not make sense that for example if a person was to say to another person to move a chair. then that person asked another person; and this cycle of asking continued, the chair would never be moved right? We believe that if the big bang happened then something must have caused it to happen, and if you are to believe it is something else (not God) then what caused that being to come into existence, and so on. There has to be a supreme cause. We believe this to be Allah. I hope I could explain this properly.
Posted by SNP1 2 years ago
SNP1
The Big Bang WAS NOT an explosion. It was the expansion of spacetime. Also, if complexity is an indication of design, the god that you claim designed the universe must be as complex or more complex than the universe. If that is the case, what designed god?
Posted by kdog519 2 years ago
kdog519
Oh my gosh, this isn't that hard to understand. I have said a million times, I don't mean the tv show!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by ButterCatX 2 years ago
ButterCatX
This will act as my rfd

Pro wins the argument points because he successfully met the BOP, while showing that the Big Bang Theory is an actual tv show, that airs on cbs composed of actual actors. Con has a poor argument that shows no reasoning on why the Big Bang Theory is not real, she also provides and opinion instead of facts as her argument by saying that the tv is "pretty ridiculous" with nothing to back that up with, saying that something is ridiculous does not explain whether it is real or not. Pro gains the conduct points because con chose the con side when she should have chosen pro which is very confusing for those reading the debate, also con did not provide any rules. Pro also gets the sources points for backing up his statements with sources, even though some of the sources are not reliable they do prove that the Big Bang Theory is a real show.
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
kdog519imabenchTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: pro uses tons of sources to prove the BBT.
Vote Placed by kingkd 2 years ago
kingkd
kdog519imabenchTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments Pro wins with more evidence. Sources only Pro had
Vote Placed by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
kdog519imabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Tie. Both sides maintained reasonable conduct. | S&G - Pro. "JUST Saying" - unnecessary capitalization of 'saying' and 'Just' is written with all capital letters. Thus, S&G to Pro. | Arguments - Pro. Con did not present their case nor present any sources, merely rephrasing the resolution. Their only 'argument' is: "JUST Saying. It's pretty ridiculous." Con did not make any attempt to defend *why* it was allegedly 'pretty ridiculous', and failed to define the terms. Pro hilariously defined the term as a TV show. Both sides actually argued contrary to the resolution, but since Con took the stance of Pro, Pro accordingly shifted their side and negated the resolution. Thus, arguments to Pro. | Sources - Pro. Pro was the only one to utilize sources. | 6 points to Pro. | As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 2 years ago
Midnight1131
kdog519imabenchTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made no arguments at all in the one round that was allotted to her in this debate. Pro used sources, and proved that the Big Bang Theory, and all of the actors making up it's cast, are real.
Vote Placed by rstreeter13 2 years ago
rstreeter13
kdog519imabenchTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Because pro just rekt con.
Vote Placed by orangutan 2 years ago
orangutan
kdog519imabenchTied
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: Kdog made no argument. imabench showed that the Big Bang Theory is a real TV show.
Vote Placed by BblackkBbirdd 2 years ago
BblackkBbirdd
kdog519imabenchTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con thinks "JUST Saying. It's pretty ridiculous." is valid argument, so arguments goes to Pro. Also pro has sources.
Vote Placed by SebUK 2 years ago
SebUK
kdog519imabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Ima proved that the Big Bang theory is true
Vote Placed by RevNge 2 years ago
RevNge
kdog519imabenchTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides argued for the wrong side, effectively invalidating their arguments.
Vote Placed by TBR 2 years ago
TBR
kdog519imabenchTied
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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Tough one to score. Con had that "JUST Saying" point, but I think Pro is right. I have seen those guys on the T.V. sooo...

Argument   = Pro | The BBT is backed by visual proof as pro has proven
Sources    = Pro | I like wikipedia!