The supernatural does not exist
Debate Rounds (4)
I contend that by means of logic and rational, critical thinking about REALITY, one can surmise that supernatural things do exist.
Supernatrual is defined as such :
(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.
"a supernatural being"
synonyms:paranormal, psychic, magic, magical, occult, mystic, mystical, superhuman, supernormal; More
manifestations or events considered to be of supernatural origin, such as ghosts.
First round is acceptance. Accepting any irrational challengers.
Another key word to point out is "so as to APPEAR" to transcend physical or natural laws. this implies, and recognizes the lack of scientific explanation for the phenomena taking place , but also does not ASSUME to know, what the actual explanation is. Whether it abides by laws of nature or not. It only says that in the lack of an explanation, it "appears to" or it " seems" or "it looks like" it transcends the laws of nature. But in actuality,,, Science has not discovered all of the laws of nature , So we do not understand if there is a higher law that would allow such supernatural phenomenon to exist and occur.
An easy example to demonstrate my point would be the Bermuda triangle. We seem to have no scientific explanation to understand why planes disappear in that region. However we do know that planes to disappear. Therefore we know the Bermuda triangle exists. We do not know what The Bermuda triangle is or what it consists of. However it would be quite a stretch to say that the Bermuda triangle was not supernatural or classified under supernatural phenomena. So I have clearly demonstrated that supernatural things do exist.
My opponent may wish to expand the definition to include other things for which we do not know whether they exist or not. However since we do not know whether they exist or not , it would not help my opponent. My opponent may further extrapolate the definition of this word, "supernatural " my opponent may further extrapolate the definition of this word, "supernatural quote to also include things like Goblins, tooth fairies, flying teapots in the sky and the like. I would like to say in that respect, when is unable to differentiate between the words "supernatural" and "imaginary ".
Although supernatural things may seem imaginary when heard about secondhand, I would like to point out that imaginary things cannot be supernatural because imaginary things simply do not exist. And if they do not exist, at all, then they can not "appear to" be or do anything!
Imaginary is not supernatural supernatural is not imaginary. However unlikely or improbable a supernatural occurrence seems, Improbability is not evidence of inexistence . In fact, the word improbability actually implies that that improbable event does exist or occur, being one small, tiny, single possibility along an infinitely expanding spectrum of possibilities. Here it is also important to note, that improbable is not the same as impossible. Unlikely is not the same as impossible. And though something may seem unlikely, it does not mean that it is impossible. And again, if something is impossible, it cannot be detected nor can it "appear to" transcend any laws, natural or fiction.
And although there are many things that are impossible , We do not yet know everything about what is possible and not possible. Do not yet know everything about nature. Therefore it is highly likely and probable to say the supernatural things do in fact exist.
Here are some more readily available supernatural phenomena, that does exist, yet for which have yet acquired a scientific understanding of:
2. The Placebo Effect
3. Miracle Healings
5. The Pyramids
6. Near Death Experiences
8. The Bermuda Triangle
9. John F Kennedy and the magic bullet
10. Jesus Christ
Supernatural - unable to be explained by science or the laws of nature : of, relating to, or seeming to come from magic, a god, etc. 
Here are the rules of scientific method:
"Ask a Question
"Do Background Research
"Construct a Hypothesis
"Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
"Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
"Communicate Your Results 
Notice this: "Test your hypothesis by doing an experiment."
If the supernatural can't be explained by science or laws of nature, then how can we conduct experiments on its existence? Reasonably, we can't. Observation is one of the core principles for scientific method, but how do we observe something that is non existent?
1) a statement about something you have noticed : a comment or remark
2) the act of careful watching and listening : the activity of paying close attention to someone or something in order to get information
3) something you notice by watching and listening 
For something to be visible, it must actually be there. It's impossible to witness magic, because it doesn't exist. You can't witness something that doesn't exist. So, in turn, observing, say, a ghost, isn't possible because ghosts. Contradictions from different sources and science has proved this. 
So, in conclusion, we can't reasonably prove the existence of supernatural beings or forces. If a being defies all science, like my definition suggests, then how can we observe it? This means we have no substantial proof, as observation serves as the evidence for all science. If we have no way of recording it with science, we can't say it's there.
Thank you and peace.
Well Pro must speak for herself. I can say love is there. Here. Everywhere. And I dont need anything but my own experience to make the judgement. I can also say that im pretty sure Pro exists, although i dont have conclusive scientific evidence to support this notion. The reason I believe Pro exists is because my past experiences on the web, and knowledge of how the web works. And this leads to a LOGICAL and RATIONAL conclusion that Pro exists And is probably not a computer program. No scientific investigation is necessary to make this obviously true claim. One would be ignorant or delusional to deny that Pro is not a person that exists outside of this forum. Why ? Because we understand how the web works. Though its feasible pro is a computer program, so i need science to prove Pro is not a stringg of code?
The argument i am setting forth with the rhetorics above should be very clear. To anyone with a critical mind. First! Absence of evidnce is not Evidence of absence. Rather it is the absence of evidnce, can more correctly be described as "ignorance." Or an absence of knowledge altogether. It certainly does not mean that that which you dont understand does not exist.
Secondly, we can come to rational conclusions about reality and about what exists and does not exist, without relying on science. Well, most of us can. However, to do so, one must be able to view reality without subjectice bias distorting their view of the world. In other words, one must learn to be Free from preconceptions or relying on concensus and popular thought. Instead one must rely one rationality, critical thinking , -in other words- independent thougtht.
Now Apply independent thought to the notion of supernatural. Though it seems unlikely or impossible,
It is something that has been defined as "appearing to " be as such. It may be that there is a supernatural apparition of st. Mary appearing before a crowd of thousands. Later science may discover that it was nothing but a simple optical illusion caused by the night sky. Even so, did the optical illusion not exist? Before you deemed it to be an optical illusion, did it not accomplish its purpose already? Did it not still "appear to defy the laws of nature". ? Even if we can no longer call it supernatural, do we also say the event itself never happened? Or that it has vanished from existence?
Can we not say "it is there." ?
Certainly not only CAN we say based on the evidence that the supernatural does exist, we can also say that it is a rational and justified belief to have. As mentioned before, since somethig supernatural must "appear to" do something , although it is unexplained, SOMETHING must be there to be causing the "appearance" of supernatural phenomena.
So this clearly means there IS visible evidence of the supernatural. For example, UFO sightings are visible and often documented, photographed, video taped etc. the sightings are increasing and being displayed all over the news. One could be considered wuite oblivious to declare "UFOs do not exist." Even Hilory Clinton vows to get to the bottommof the UFO phenomena.
The supernatural DOES exist. Only science has no rational explanation FOR it to be considered natural. As also mentioned before supernatural is not imaginary or fictious. Nor does it make sense to equate the two concepts. Further , supernatural is not necessariy somethjng that defys natural laws. It only must appear to defy natural law. So by definition , even magic tricks are supernatural. once the secret of the trick is revealed, it becomes a trick. But until then, to the oblivious masses it is considered magic , ie. Supernatural.
missbailey8 forfeited this round.
Even if we determine an explanation for supernatural things, it doesnt mean they simply stop being there.
Believe in God. He is righteousness.
missbailey8 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 10 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||1||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff many times, so conduct to Con.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.