All Debates
You are browsing through all debates. You can refine the results by using the drop-down boxes above. You can view more information about each debate by clicking Show Details at right.
First, read Clarke's three laws.
1.When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2.The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3.Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
The third law is the one I want to deal with. I disagree with the statement. If you went back in time to ancient Sumer, a cigarette lighter would be amazing. But to us, it isn't. It's not hard to find out how one works. Even a space rocket isn't so amazing to us, but would boggle the minds of people just 500 years ago.
My point is this: the third law is false because our frame of reference always remains "the present". Current advancements that would seem like magic to people of the past do not to us because we live in the present. If somebody from the future showed us their tech, it would be a true statement. But that will never happen. Therefore, discuss "we will never experience 'sufficiently advanced technology' because our frame of reference will always remain as 'the present', true or false?"
I have heard many people say that science proves God's existence and that much of the Bible has pieces of science in it which the writers of the books "could not have known without God".
Do you think science affirms religion, or do you think that these are false claims based upon misunderstandings in the Bible and scientific theories?
Do you feel there is any group of people who should be eradicated?
I want to know how many Create Debate users out there feel a group of people (any group for any reason) should no longer exist, or if the world would have been better off if they never had existed in the first place.
Most people think genocide is wrong, but most people also think the human race could be a little better.
I myself do not think anybody should cease to exist or should never have existed.
So the main question is: do you think the human species would be better off without certain groups of people?
I believe the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. I think the Earth came from the sun, a group of debris which collected and formed a planet, gradually cooling until life was able to form. I do not think that the Earth is 6,000 years old, created spontaneously by a God before the sun was made.
What do you think and what is your proof for your stance?