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

god or gods is fake

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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: 6/10/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 624 times Debate No: 56396
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (3)

 

Racarra

Pro

is there a god or is it just fake lies that someone came up with. i dont want any bible verses just pure science. no asking the same question 100 times ether please.
Mike_10-4

Con

I am pleased to see Pro is requesting "pure science" in this debate. There are far too many debates over God and evolution with little science. So let's get started.

This debate states quite clearly "god or gods is fake" claims Pro. Therefore, the burden for scientific evidence to verify said claim is on Pro.

With that said, I am eagerly waiting for the evidence. Evidence I been long waiting to see.
Debate Round No. 1
Racarra

Pro

well first thing first i do no believe in evolution but at the same time i do not believe in a god or gods. #1 if god created the world how was god or gods created. by looking into that we see that its imposable for it to have happened. if you have anything that can prove god is real please tell me and if you are an atheist please give me a more in depth view on it.
Mike_10-4

Con

With all due respect, my Friend Pro, the point of this debate is "pure science," in your words. It was kind of you to share with Con that you "do not believe in a god or gods," however, that is not empirical evidence relative to the scientific method.

You made the claim, the origin of this debate, that "god or gods is fake." You further stipulated that you want "pure science," so do I. So, please forward the empirical evidence supporting your claim.
Debate Round No. 2
Racarra

Pro

Racarra forfeited this round.
Mike_10-4

Con

I regret Con was unable to furnish the empirical evidence supporting his claim. On the other hand, I hope Con found it a learning experience, during his research, that the scientific method has its limits on both the technology in metrology and from human biases on the empirical. Where they are both fallible, but over time had served us well.

My advice to Con, is to present a debate on the one who has faith, where they have the burden of proof.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Mike_10-4 3 years ago
Mike_10-4
Good point Sagey. You can't tell us apart because we all resemble you, a part of the human family. We all have a desire to understand our existence, our place in the universe, why we are here, and on, and on. Hence, the miracle of the internet, and sites like Debate.org to exchange our philosophies to learn from each other. And in saying that, I'm glad you can"t tell us apart.
Posted by Sagey 3 years ago
Sagey
I cannot tell pro from con, they look so much alike, maybe they are twins??
Posted by Burncastle 3 years ago
Burncastle
Wow, good luck Pro. Taking the burden of proof in these debates is basically suicide.
Posted by dsjpk5 3 years ago
dsjpk5
Pro is in trouble. I am interested in seeing what kind of scientific evidence pro has for "God is fake".
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Sagey 3 years ago
Sagey
RacarraMike_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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: The Title was not well thought up, giving Con the edge.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 3 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
RacarraMike_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: ff
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 3 years ago
dsjpk5
RacarraMike_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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not capitalize at the beginning of the first sentence. Also, "impossible" was misspelled. Pro offered no scientific evidence (as promised).