Does God Exist? Debate
Yes, here is my evidence...
Side Score: 33
Winning Side! |
 |
No, here is my evidence...
Side Score: 32
|
|
|
|
|
In 1966 Time Magazine ran a story called "Is God Dead?". This story was created because many people have excepted the cultural narrative that God is obsolete. A better way to explain it is as science progresses, there is no need for a God to explain the Universe. However, the rumors where premature. The existence of god can be explain through science itself. Let me explain, that same year an astronomer name Carl Sagan announced that there were two criteria for a planet to sustain life. These criteria were the right kind of star and a planet the right distance from that star. As knowledge of the universe increased, it became clear that there were far more factors necessary for life. His two criteria's grew from two to ten and from ten to twenty and from twenty to fifty. This meant that the number of potentially life supporting decreased as criteria increased. Peter Schenkel wrote in a 2006 piece for Skeptical Inquirer (An Atheist Magazine): "In light of new findings and insights, we should quietly admit that the early estimates my no longer be tenable." There are over 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life and every parameter must be met or the entire thing falls apart. For example: without massive gravitational planets like Jupiter nearby to draw asteroids, Earth would be destroyed due to constant attack from asteroids. Therefore, the odds against life in the Universe are immense. Yet we are here debating, living and contemplating if there is an omnipotent force in the Universe! Is that not amazing? Can every one of the many parameters have been flawlessly met by accident? Is it fair to admit that it is science itself that suggest that we cannot be the result of random forces? The fine-tuning for life to exist on a planet is nothing compared to the fine-tuning of the Universe to exist at all! Astrophysicist now know that the values of the four fundamental forces, gravity, electromagnetic, strong nuclear, weak nuclear, were determined less then one millionth of a second after the Big Bang. If any of these values were to be altered, the Universe as we know it could not exist. The odds against the Universe existing are so unbelievably Astronomical that notion that the Universe "just happened" defies common sense. Its like flipping a coin and having it come up heads 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times in a row. Do you think that is possible? The greatest miracle of all time is the Universe. We know for a fact that the Universe is expanding.We also know that time flows in one direction, meaning that there had to be a starting point in time. That starting point was the Big Bang. Are you telling me that the Big Bang just came out of nowhere? Or could there possibly be a force, an omnipotent force, that Created the big bang? Science proves that there has to be a starting point to the Universe. I believe that starting point, is God. I hope you liked my argument, whether you are for or against the existence of God. Also, since I am a Christian I hope you would give me some credit for not using or quoting the bible as reference since referencing the bible in a debate about whether or not God exist is like using the word Love to define Love. As for my Atheist friends in the Chat, I know that this wont make you believers immediately, but I hope this at least gets you think about the existence of God and I hope one day you you will find your way to Jesus. And if this argument at least made you a skeptic, you should know that Jesus died for you knowing you might not love him in return. Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
1
point
As for my Atheist friends in the Chat, I know that this wont make you believers immediately, but I hope this at least gets you think about the existence of God and I hope one day you you will find your way to Jesus. And if this argument at least made you a skeptic, It isn't enough to convert any reasonable person, or even plant doubt. Primarily, you have no idea about what you are speaking. Of all you've said here, I give you credit for only two things, there had to be a starting point in time. And that life is unlikely. Anything else is nothing more than ignorance and wishful thinking. Side: No, here is my evidence...
I just want to clarify that my intention was not to convert anyone, my intention was to give scientific evidence to the possible existence of a higher power without using the bible. My intention was to challenge the way someone perceived the Universe if they believed in the idea that something can come from nothing. I respect your opinion on the matter but saying that the majority of my argument wishful thinking and that it is full of ignorance is nothing more then a logical fallacy. I spoke about scientific studies, scientist and names of articles that can be found online about how life in the Universe is extremely unlikely. I also explained about how we are here speaking about this scientific evidence that life is unlikely. I spoke about scientific proof on how there are more then 200 parameters that require sustainable life in the universe and each of these needs to be perfect in order for a planet to fall into that category. I also explained how if any of the four fundamental forces needed to create the Universe were altered in the slightest way, the Universe as we know it would cease to exist. If you ask me you are the one being ignorant. How can you agree upon the existence of a creator yet reject the information I give that could possibly explain the creator's contribution to the Universe? Or do you believe that if there was a creator, he created the big bang and did nothing afterwards? Is this all just a coincidence in your eyes? Again I'm not trying to convert anyone, I am just saying it is not wrong to question things in life in order to find answers and discover how they want to live their life. Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
I just want to clarify that my intention was not to convert anyone, my intention was to give scientific evidence to the possible existence of a higher power without using the bible. My intention was to challenge the way someone perceived the Universe if they believed in the idea that something can come from nothing. I respect your opinion on the matter but saying that the majority of my argument wishful thinking and that it is full of ignorance is nothing more then a logical fallacy. I spoke about scientific studies, scientist and names of articles that can be found online about how life in the Universe is extremely unlikely. I also explained about how we are here speaking about this scientific evidence that life is unlikely. I spoke about scientific proof on how there are more then 200 parameters that require sustainable life in the universe and each of these needs to be perfect in order for a planet to fall into that category. I also explained how if any of the four fundamental forces needed to create the Universe were altered in the slightest way, the Universe as we know it would cease to exist. If you ask me you are the one being ignorant. How can you agree upon the existence of a creator yet reject the information I give that could possibly explain the creator's contribution to the Universe? Or do you believe that if there was a creator, he created the big bang and did nothing afterwards? Is this all just a coincidence in your eyes? Again I'm not trying to convert anyone, I am just saying it is not wrong to question things in life in order to find answers and discover how they want to live their life. Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
Why should I apologies for my beliefs? Do you see me telling you to apologies for your non-beliefs? This is a debate. There are two sides to it and I have yet to attacked anyone. I gave an opinion and that is something you should have done too instead of using an ad-hominem attack. Conduct yourself appropriately please. Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
1
point
I hope you liked my argument Your argument is the same regurgitated nonsense that has been refuted for years. I hope you would give me some credit for not using or quoting the bible I do appreciate that, but you have basically plagiarized this video: https://www.youtube.com/ It's actually impossible to determine the probability of our universe existing. You claim it's like having heads come up 110^24, but this is the gambler's fallacy. In order to state the odds of 110^24 heads in a row are incredibly high (I'm not even going to try to do that math on this one), you would first have to make the decision to flip the coin that many times. Let's use a smaller number for the sake of easy math. Let's say we were to flip that same coin just 5 times. What are the chances of getting 5 heads in a row? 1 in 32. Now, if you have managed to flip that coin 4 times and each time has come up heads, what are the chances the next toss will be a head? 1 in 2. Why? Because despite the odds of flipping a coin 5 times and getting a head each time is 1 in 32, each toss is a separate occurrence. Also, though the odds of heads coming up 5 times is 1 in 32, the chances of getting tails 5 times is 1 in 32, getting tails twice and heads 3 times is 1 in 32. Any way you can think of the outcome occuring has the same odds, again because they are separate occurrences. So since the probability of the universe existing can't actually be calculated, let's take a look at your fine-tuning argument for the existence of life. I'm not really going to touch on the probability of it occurring since we only have a sample size of 1 and it's not particularly easy to determine probability from that. That said, to say the universe has been finely tuned for life to exist is absurd. The diameter of the observable universe is estimated to about 93 billion light years. How big is a light year? 5.87849981*10^12 miles. You're suggesting that because life managed to emerge on a tiny planet, just 7,917.5 miles in diameter, that the universe was finely tuned for it? That's like suggesting That's like suggesting Buckingham Palace was so finely tuned for a dust particle to exist. Also keep in the mind the fact we have not been able to really explore much of space so we don't know if there's life elsewhere. Just look at the fact NASA has recently discovered a star with 7 planets orbiting and 3 of which are in the "Goldilocks zone". All of this aside, whether the odds are for or against is irrelevant, as it still doesn't provide evidence that a god exists. Side: No, here is my evidence...
1
point
I CAN PROVE YOU 100% WRONG BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT. OF COURSE THE MASTER YOU SERVE IS THE INFERIOR MASTER, SO THAT EXPLAINS THAT... https://www.facebook.com/ Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
1
point
The existence of god can be explain through science itself. It cannot, God is supernatural in concept. The odds against the Universe existing are so unbelievably Astronomical that notion that the Universe "just happened" defies common sense. Its like flipping a coin and having it come up heads 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times in a row. Do you think that is possible? The greatest miracle of all time is the Universe. We know for a fact that the Universe is expanding. Your basis here is known the teleological argument for the existence of God. First of all, this does not entail God's existence being explained through science. All it says here is that in order for life as we know it to exist, certain criteria must be met. The big problem with this argument is it doesn't take into account what life even is and its different possible relations to chemical structure. If we were to alter the universe, the life specific material and chemical structures would be relative to the properties of the universe. Therefore, it follows that life structures have a basis in the factors of the specific universe, and not vice-versa. That starting point was the Big Bang. Are you telling me that the Big Bang just came out of nowhere? Or could there possibly be a force, an omnipotent force, that Created the big bang? Science proves that there has to be a starting point to the Universe. I believe that starting point, is God. Science does not "prove" that there has to be a starting point for the universe. You are the one saying the universe came out of nowhere and from nothing. You think an immaterial force created the universe with no time or space. Side: No, here is my evidence...
1
point
ATHEISM IS EASILY PROVEN WRONG. THAT'S WHAT IS THE SAD THING ABOUT IT. https://www.facebook.com/ Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
1
point
Yep. Here is my evidence... https://www.facebook.com/ Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
1
point
Yes, and here's more evidence. The evidence that the Atheists are afraid of.... https://www.facebook.com/ Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
1
point
ATHEISM: THE LACK OF LOGIC AND PROOF RUNS DEEP IN THIS ONE... https://www.facebook.com/ Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
0
points
1
point
Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
1
point
1
point
|
1
point
No. Here is my evidence. Theists 1 Atheists 0 https://www.facebook.com/ Side: No, here is my evidence...
God is a fictional character made up in a book from a long time ago. There really is no evidence for God. The only thing people claim as "evidence" is The Bible. But personally, I believe that The Bible was a fictional book somebody wrote and then a person later in life who found it was mistaken that it was true. I accept peoples opinions, which I think many atheists do about Christians because to be honest atheists don't really give a shit. Sure, people can go waste their time praying to a person they don't even know exists and hoping everything turns out okay. They can follow rules that they found from a book. As an atheist, I don't even think about religion. I think its pointless to argue over something that either side could be right or wrong. But go ahead, be the purest you can be. Never sin. Never do something "dangerous" because thats a sin to god. You obviously can't like the same gender, or be a different color. But besides my sarcasm, maybe you should stop worrying about God and start making decisions because you want to. We shouldn't kill people over opinions and religion. Just live your life. Side: No, here is my evidence...
In the absence of any credible explanation for our existence and the presence of the universe I believe that there must be a creator(s) but not as described by any of the main, man made religions. In my opinion evolution is well past the 'theory' stage and should be accepted as scientific fact. However, the big bang theory as an explanation for the start of the whole evolutionary process and the creation of the ever expanding universe, is unbelievable and I have difficulty understanding why so many clever scientists believe, and ask us to believe that something can come from nothing. From where did this minuscule spec of dust which gave birth to the immensity of the universe and life on earth come? Why did the spontaneous appearance of this ''magic' particle occur when it did? Would it not be more credible to assume that some ''entity'' triggered the process? So far the eye-wateringly stupid religions nor the implausible claims about 'the big bang' don't offer any rational explanation for the mind boggling wonders of the universe and our existence. Side: No, here is my evidence...
1
point
Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
0
points
There is only one argument for God that can be agreed upon, of all the things I've heard - the creator/first cause argument. But even there, like always, it is just theists chickening out from any explanations while atheists don't have sufficient information for making any claims. (If light travelled at infinite speeds, we could see the whole universe. Sort of. We'd also need to see non light emitting stuff, and be able to study it.) And it's not easy enough to explain here, unless you know enough about physics and maths. The universe is finite, infinite or perhaps not even euclidean. Either way, there is no reason to believe that this planet is any special. To end it, I'd say, if light travelled at infinite speeds, all matter that emits it would have radiated almost instantaneously. Side: No, here is my evidence...
Atheism doesn't make any claims. As an atheist, I simply do not believe a god exists. No claim was made, just simply a statement that I don't believe. The theists and deists are the ones making claims and are therefore responsible for providing the evidence to support it. Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
2
points
2
points
1
point
1
point
1
point
HERE'S AN EVEN BETTER ARGUMENT... https://www.facebook.com/ Side: No, here is my evidence...
0
points
1
point
SURE IT IS. ENJOY THE DESTRUCTION OF ATHEISM. THESE ARE THE DAYS OF THE SON OF MAN, IF YOU DARE LOOK. ATHEISM ISN'T NEW, BUT IT'S ALWAYS SERVED ITS MASTER WELL. https://www.facebook.com/ Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
1
point
0
points
1
point
SURE WE DO. HAVE FUN... THEN GOBBLE MORE PROZAK... https://www.facebook.com/ Side: Yes, here is my evidence...
|
