The Instigator
stefan600
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mike_10-4
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

There is no god

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 3 votes the winner is...
Mike_10-4
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/1/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 622 times Debate No: 55873
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

stefan600

Pro

There is no conclusive evidence for anyone to base their lives around the idea of god. You only live once, don't try and waste it devoting your life to some magical man in the sky who probably doesn't exist. We run this world on a basis of evidence, for example when in court, evidence is used to declare which is guilty, not "faith" or superstitious nonsense. A lawyer would not say i have faith in my client not being guilty and get taken seriously by the jury. It should be the same case in religious debating
Mike_10-4

Con

How could you be so sure there is no God? You say "there is no conclusive evidence," which implies you are satisfied with the narrow scope of metrology confined to our universe. That is, our fallible metrology, unable to pierce the boundary and make observations in other universes.
Debate Round No. 1
stefan600

Pro

When I say there is no god, I say it with my bones. There is as much chance of there being a god as there is an Easter bunny. We cannot positively prove there is no god, as we cannot with the Easter bunny. But I say there is not god with 99.9999 percent surety, of course I cannot be fully certain there isn't a god
Mike_10-4

Con

""of course I cannot be fully certain there isn't a god."

I see, we are making progress here. The title of your debate is "There is no god." That is an absolute statement. Yet you now claim you "cannot be fully certain there isn"t a god."

I think this debate is over.
Debate Round No. 2
stefan600

Pro

stefan600 forfeited this round.
Mike_10-4

Con

My apologies stefan600, for a lucky knockout punch in the second round.

As you continue your "no God" crusade, as I notice in other debates, please keep the following in mind. Today"s physicist believe in parallel universes:

http://www.npr.org...

Perhaps, God exist in one of those universes. My advice, you better be a good boy in this universe.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by GarthVader 2 years ago
GarthVader
Funny stuff! Unfounded claims of alien life on other planets, and using the understanding of a dog to justify dis/belief in something. How often do you smoke crack?
Posted by therealsunson 2 years ago
therealsunson
god isnt real lol. Is there god in other alien like planets? no lol dogs dont even know what god is. we just made up the term god lol dumbasses
Posted by GarthVader 2 years ago
GarthVader
There is no conclusive evidence for one to base his life around the idea of ignorant randomness having created living things. To suggest that the living is created by the non-living is to claim a supernatural event which no lawyer can defend, because there is no evidence of any such event ever occurring is nature. There is, however, conclusive evidence that life only comes from the living. In fact, it is a natural law in which no exception has ever been found, and is supported by definitive scientific evidence. To hope otherwise, is to willfully ignore scientific principles and natural laws, and cling to a foundation-less faith in the miraculous....and is clearly the realm of a religious belief.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Cold-Mind 2 years ago
Cold-Mind
stefan600Mike_10-4Tied
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: Neither made arguments.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
stefan600Mike_10-4Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed to prove no god exists and forfeited a round.
Vote Placed by Ajab 2 years ago
Ajab
stefan600Mike_10-4Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct goes to Con because Pro forfeited. I would have given source to Con had he shown why his source was important, or how it linked to this topic. Also while stefan made a slight concession Mike did not address it properly.