The Instigator
ArtfulDodger
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
vardas0antras
Con (against)
Losing
7 Points

There is a higher power/god

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 7 votes the winner is...
ArtfulDodger
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/27/2010 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,950 times Debate No: 13487
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (23)
Votes (7)

 

ArtfulDodger

Pro

Scientists say that the Big Bang created the Universe and everything in it. This means that before the Big Bang there was nothing.

The Big Bang is when particles collided. Where did these particles come from when there was nothing to begin with? If the Big Bang Theory created the three-dimensional space we know and love, how can particles exist before this was created?

Also, before space-time, there was nothing, try and imagine nothing. This means that particles came from no where and collided in nothing to form space-time.

This goes against all the rules of science and isn't logical which means there must be another explanation - God. A higher power that must have at least spark the Big Bang.
vardas0antras

Con

First i like to thank ArtfulDodger for this interesting debate.

1.My Goal
'This goes against all the rules of science and isn't logical which means there must be another explanation - God. A higher power that must have at least spark the Big Bang.'
According to this statement for me to win I have to prove that
evolution is a logical and a scientific theory that is capable of replacing God.By doing this I have refuted your claim that there must be a higher power.

2.Your arguments
a)If the Big Bang Theory created the three-dimensional space we know and love, how can particles exist before this was created?
b)This means that particles came from no where and collided in nothing to form space-time.

3.My response
a)The "Big Bang Theory" is just that a scientific theory -- an explanation for observable phenomenon using scientific methodology to determine the causes for the phenomena and to understand what forces may account for said phenomena.

Human understanding is best developed via interplay between theory and practice. We need sound theories to inform and guide our practical activities, in order to move forward and flourish as beings. Theology and all the various religious belief systems have a place in human understanding, as does science. The discoveries and ideas in physics and astronomy have been enormously beneficial for all of humanity; we've learned how stars shine and how most of the elements were formed inside these stars. We have learned to use these same elements to send human beings to the moon and probes beyond our own solar system.

Wherefore a gap of knowledge or a discovery that is not in accord with the Big Bang theory isn't the end of the Big Bang theory.Evolution just like Gravity have some unanswered questions http://www.bringyou.to... .The big bang theory is supported with a lot of scientific evidence, and is accepted by most scientists today like gravity.For they are still scientific and logical theory's.

In conclusion God doesn't have to exist for the theory of evolution and the big bang theory to be accepted. God isnt the only explanation.Your burden of proof is that a God is a must for the big bang to occur.
Debate Round No. 1
ArtfulDodger

Pro

OK, I'll got at it from a slightly different point of view. The watch argument.

If someone found a watch on the ground, not knowing what the device, they might pick it up, examine it, open it and look inside at the mechanism and see how all the clogs worked flawlessly with each other to turn the hands on the face, how complicated it is and then automatically know that there must have been a designer, this couldn't happen by accident. There must have been a watch designer who planned it then created it.

Using the same logic, the Universe is very complicated, there are stars, there the Sun which gives us light and heat but somehow we are just the right distance from it so it won't kill all life on earth but so we also won't freeze. The Moon orbits the Earth and the Earth orbits the sun. Everything has it's own path is is part of an intricate system which is extremely complicated - even more complicated than a watch.

Let's talk about life on earth. Humans for example have hearts to pup blood around the body, especially to the brain, which controls the body and the lungs which provide oxygen to the brain and other parts of your body and your stomach which just happens to have the exact acid to break down your food, intestines which keep the valuable nutrients in your food and get rid of the waste and other vital organs. This all happened because some particles accidentally collided in space and released matter and anti-matter?

A higher power had to play a role in all this.
vardas0antras

Con

I like to thank Pro for his quick response.

Yes life is indeed complex.One explanation for this is God but the other explanation is evolution. Evolution is still a possibility (and a widely accepted possibility).Hence God is only a possibility.

vote Con because Pro doesn't give valid arguments !
Debate Round No. 2
ArtfulDodger

Pro

Haha, I'm pretty sure that I'm giving more than valid points here mate =D.

Anyway, evolution still doesn't explain it because how on earth did a single cell organism turn in to a human who is so complex. Also think about plants with their long roots so they can find water easily and their leaves so they can absorb more sun and a stem to send up water and nutrients from the soil. That concept on it's own is quite complex and it can't be down to a big accident. The whole eco-system works seamlessly together to sustain life and you're saying it's all down to a big accident and survival of the fittest?
vardas0antras

Con

Heres a website which refutes your (second) argument: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Id like to point out that even if there was no way to refute your claim i still win because there is a possibility of evolution without god in it.
Debate Round No. 3
ArtfulDodger

Pro

OK, let's turn to the Cosmological argument. Everything has to have a cause, there must have been a cause to the first thing that ever happened (The Big Bang Theory), somone had to set that of i.e. the higher power.
vardas0antras

Con

We dont know.Maybe the Big Bang itself was the first cause but because we dont know doesnt mean that evolution isnt true in fact evolution has more pros than cons hence God is still not a must for evolution.Id like to also point out that my argument in round 1 hasnt been refuted and it has to be refuted for Pro to win.

Vote Con because its better than Pro
Debate Round No. 4
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ArtfulDodger 6 years ago
ArtfulDodger
Yay, I won my first debate.
Posted by vardas0antras 6 years ago
vardas0antras
i know i know and i can see why (although i disagree) one would make this a tie, Im rather content with this result
Posted by ArtfulDodger 6 years ago
ArtfulDodger
Do you have to do research if you already know what you're talking about? I'm baffled.
Posted by Rodriguez47 6 years ago
Rodriguez47
Vardas, were purposely making it a tie.
Posted by vardas0antras 6 years ago
vardas0antras
So the unexpected has happened...A tie!
Posted by Rodriguez47 6 years ago
Rodriguez47
It's not a sirious debate because you didn't do any research on your behalf.
Posted by LiquidLiquid 6 years ago
LiquidLiquid
Cause it's not a serious debate. Thus the motivation to choose one person over another is based on shallow things. Now unless someone giving out sexual favors/money, I doubt it's going to change.
Posted by ArtfulDodger 6 years ago
ArtfulDodger
How come everyone wants it to be a tie? Am I missing something?
Posted by dinokiller 6 years ago
dinokiller
hmm, someone make it a tie, i too cant see this as a serious debate
Posted by ArtfulDodger 6 years ago
ArtfulDodger
Haha sorry guys, I realise that this was messed up. New to this website and forgot to give sources (even though I didn't use any websites). I'll improve =D
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by PrvnMthws 6 years ago
PrvnMthws
ArtfulDodgervardas0antrasTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by Rodriguez47 6 years ago
Rodriguez47
ArtfulDodgervardas0antrasTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Vote Placed by zach12 6 years ago
zach12
ArtfulDodgervardas0antrasTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Vote Placed by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
ArtfulDodgervardas0antrasTied
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:42 
Vote Placed by LiquidLiquid 6 years ago
LiquidLiquid
ArtfulDodgervardas0antrasTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:22 
Vote Placed by sherlockmethod 6 years ago
sherlockmethod
ArtfulDodgervardas0antrasTied
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 
Vote Placed by jarob903 6 years ago
jarob903
ArtfulDodgervardas0antrasTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01