The Instigator
nires
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
petersaysstuff
Con (against)
Winning
23 Points

islam is the true religion

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/23/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 830 times Debate No: 16641
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (4)

 

nires

Pro

you say that we come from apes... where is the proof
petersaysstuff

Con

I do not say we come from apes, I say we come from a common ancestor.
First off, some scientists long ago in a galaxy far far away noticed the minute differences in the chromosome numbers of apes and humans. (apes having 24 pairs in egg and sperm and humans having 23) This discovery led people to think that they might be closely related and one of the chromosomes fused hence our 23 pairs. And now we know, without a doubt, that this is the case and this clearly points towards common accestory.
http://www.gate.net...

This is just one piece of evidence out of much much more but as to not go over kill on this I will simply leave this for my opponent to try to refute or explain away. I await my opponent's responses on this debate as well as our other.
Debate Round No. 1
nires

Pro

does everything, including earth's existence, happen in coincidence
petersaysstuff

Con

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say sure. Are you going to respond to my argument that I now extend?
Debate Round No. 2
nires

Pro

nires forfeited this round.
petersaysstuff

Con

Extend and vote CON!
Debate Round No. 3
nires

Pro

nires forfeited this round.
petersaysstuff

Con

Extend and vote Con!
Debate Round No. 4
nires

Pro

if you were to get kidnapped who would you hope for you to save you. you would feel lonely so if there is no creater of this earth and it is an coincdent then it is a oincident that you got kinapped leaning to noone to help you. it is a coincident that i am using this word. don't you think that if someone wasto come to you and say that this car is a coincident. you would think that man is either dumb or is not listening to the fact. if you wre to look at a house. it is well structured and everything is put into exact place. sure the house must have a creater. but something that is as difficult as earth has to have a creater. you say that it is nature but dont you think nature must have a creator. just beccause man cannot create adrop of water it doesnt mean that the water has no creator. the creator is there with many signs to us but people are just too blind to see it. how can a blind man put a jigsaw puzzle altogether perfectly in one go? How came, if earth just happened in a big bang in space, that earth has gravity but space does not? Prove to me that leanardo painted the mona lisa. i want a proof, i think that that painting just happen over the blue... i wnat you to prove to me everything happened in coincidence.... proove to me that gravity exists. i dont belive gravity exict... prove it to me!
petersaysstuff

Con

//if you were to get kidnapped who would you hope for you to save you//
My parents.......

//you would feel lonely so if there is no creater of this earth//
I suggest you don't tell someone how they would feel. I assure you there is no creator of the earth and I am not lonely.

//and it is an coincdent then it is a oincident that you got kinapped leaning to noone to help you.//
What? Well it may or may not be a coincident that I got kidnapped but that has nothing to do with god...

//it is a coincident that i am using this word.//
False. You obviously planned this out thus you using a word is NOT a coincident.

//don't you think that if someone wasto come to you and say that this car is a coincident. you would think that man is either dumb or is not listening to the fact.//
ummmmmm it seems you do not know the definition of coincident. A coincident is as follows: "Occupying the same area in space or happening at the same time:"[1] I think what you mean to say is that "this car came into existence our of nothing." If a man were to say that I would say, "according to quantum mechanics that is possible but the improbability outweighs it."

//if you wre to look at a house. it is well structured and everything is put into exact place. sure the house must have a creater.//
True.

//but something that is as difficult as earth has to have a creater. you say that it is nature but dont you think nature must have a creator.//
This is false. Saying this you ignore the facts about how planets are formed. You are like the man in the story you told a moment ago. But you also have completely ignored the evolution argument and thus I win on that alone.

//just beccause man cannot create adrop of water it doesnt mean that the water has no creator/
*facepalm* I never said that. The thing is we have a perfect understanding of how water forms.

//How came, if earth just happened in a big bang in space, that earth has gravity but space does not?/
Space does have gravity. It just a very small amount due to the very small amount of matter in it (virtual particles) Also, the earth did not happen via a Big Bang, you are mixing up the earth and the universe.

You are asking me to prove X painted Y. I cannot prove to you that Leo painted the Mona Lisa but if you look at all the facts and come to a conclusion for your self you can see...
You want me to prove gravity? Ok, stand up. Are you on your feet? Now jump in the air. Wait.....wait...wait.. BAM! Your feet have hit the ground. That is due to the Earth's gravitational pull.

Do I really need to explain why you should vote Con? Grammar, spelling, dropped arguments, no original arguments ect....

[1] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by wolfhaines 6 years ago
wolfhaines
Having a pathetic fear of nothing after death or for being in control of our own destiny is NOT an excuse to make up stories and to falsely convince ourselves there is a God. The fact so many religious people reveal this fear as a reason for believing what they do just shows they don't actually believe their religion, just want to sleep better at night. There is NO true religion. Humanism all the way!
Posted by kohai 6 years ago
kohai
I agree. Con wins hands down
Posted by BennyW 6 years ago
BennyW
I think I have already decided who I am going to vote for.
Posted by petersaysstuff 6 years ago
petersaysstuff
Benny, I am equally if not more confused. I am up for either though xD
Posted by BennyW 6 years ago
BennyW
I am confused, I thought this was going to be a debate about Islam but is now a creation vs. Evolution debate.
Posted by petersaysstuff 6 years ago
petersaysstuff
It seems like you are shifting the BOP to me because you can't prove your god exists.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
nirespetersaysstuffTied
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: ff
Vote Placed by quarterexchange 6 years ago
quarterexchange
nirespetersaysstuffTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had multiple spelling and grammatical errors, forfeited multiple rounds, produced ridiculous arguments, and had no sources. Con was the excact opposite
Vote Placed by Yorble 6 years ago
Yorble
nirespetersaysstuffTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: The forfeits in rounds 3 and 4 and Con actually presenting sources.
Vote Placed by Raisor 6 years ago
Raisor
nirespetersaysstuffTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Easy decision. This might just be my preference but: In the future dont just link to a website or post a video. Quote the relevant stuff and post the links as your citations. Otherwise a debate can easily explode size wise as people arent actually posting arguments, they are just posting links to arguments.