CreateDebate


Debate Info

18
14
But you're right. Okay...
Debate Score:32
Arguments:27
Total Votes:41
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 But you're right. (15)
 
 Okay... (12)

Debate Creator

Logically(192) pic



God most likely doesn't exist. Prove me wrong.

Give me some sort of factual, scientific evidence for the existence of God. Otherwise, the chances of him existing are the same chances for unicorns, elves, or leprechauns.

But you're right.

Side Score: 18
VS.

Okay...

Side Score: 14
0 points

Get ready for a long parade of superstitious brainwashed people telling you in one way or another that God is real because they BELIEVE he's real. And really, that's all they've got.

I'm betting you've seen the documentary Zeitgeist? I do find the history of religion fascinating.

Side: But you're right.
achilles_(51) Disputed
1 point

First of all, I'm not brainwashed. Second, yes, I do believe that God is real and that I know he exists. You may believe that he doesn't exist, but I believe that he does. But really no, it's not all we've got. If you look at nature, it is really complex, and filled with great design. Shouldn't it seem that there must've been some creator that made all this possible? You can look at the human body, and it's actually more complex than the machines we have, such as robots, and computers. And we know for a fact that computers didn't create themselves, they had a creator, which is us. Did you know that the Bible mentions dinosaurs? It does, in the book of Job. And the book was written thousands of years before the first dinosaur was discovered, where people then started to know about them. But speaking of dinosaurs, do you really think that a dinosaur fossil can stay intact after MILLIONS of years? And not only that, but there have been DNA and blood found in a T-Rex fossil. How could DNA last for that long? Also, there have been civilizations where people have drawn pictures of humans and dinosaurs together. How could they know what a dinosaur looks like if they were supposed to be extinct? So clearly humans and dinosaurs have lived side by side at one point. And how do you explain the fact that Earth is the only planet to sustain life? How do you explain the fact that the conditions on earth are the necessary things to help humans live? What were the chances of having a habitable planet for sustaining life?

Side: Okay...
1 point

If you look at nature, it is really complex, and filled with great design. Shouldn't it seem that there must've been some creator that made all this possible?

Well, if that were the case, why doesn't Mars have all of these amazing things, like nature and humans? If god created the universe, wouldn't he have put in a little time on the other planets? It's been proven that Mars has no life. Yes, you could perhaps argue that there were humans/lifeforms on Mars and something terrible wiped them out, but there isn't any/enough evidence to support those claims.

So clearly humans and dinosaurs have lived side by side at one point.

I disagree. According to fossil evidence, the earliest human fossils date back 6 million years ago, while the latest dinosaur fossils are 65 million years old. Then again, all of this depends on a few rocks in the sand, so maybe they did live together at some point late into the dinosaurs' lifetimes.

What were the chances of having a habitable planet for sustaining life?

If the earth wasn't hospitable, we wouldn't be here, right? I haven't researched enough into other planets, but I do know that we can't live on Mars because for some reason, we can't breathe anything but oxygen.

Side: But you're right.
Quantumhead(733) Disputed
0 points

Get ready for a long parade of superstitious brainwashed people telling you in one way or another that God is real because they BELIEVE he's real. And really, that's all they've got.

You are correct, Rusticus. However, the precise same criticism can be made of atheists (i.e. God isn't real because atheists believe he isn't real).

I am very careful not to conflate the damaging effects of religion with the possibility that the universe (or biological life) had a creator. The damaging effects of religion can be criticised because they are very demonstrable and real. The debate between creation versus accident is however one of pure speculation.

Side: Okay...
Logically(192) Clarified
2 points

However, the precise same criticism can be made of atheists

Very true; however, when you take into account the amount of theists in the world versus the amount of evidence for a god existing versus the amount of atheists in the world versus the amount of evidence in favor of ideas that very directly contradict religion (the big bang, evolution, abiogenesis, etc.), you'll soon see that there is an overwhelming about of ignorance among believers. The chances of any specific god that has been proposed throughout humanity's history being the god is practically infinitesimal, compared to scientific research and the plain abundance of them. They're all shots-in-the-dark and were useful for explaining what we didn't know before science started actually answering those questions; and it seems theists are being backed into a corner of ignorance as science continues to disprove aspects of religion while at the same time theists are grasping to alter their interpretations of religious texts from literal to figurative.

"No no no, the bible didn't really mean there was a flood, or that stars really fall from the sky, or the snake really talked, it was figurative".

Side: But you're right.
Rusticus(1959) Disputed
1 point

I don't agree that the debate between creation vs accident is pure speculation because there's far more evidence for an accident than there is of a God creating everything.

Side: But you're right.
AlofRI(3154) Clarified
1 point

I sometimes agree with you Q, but not here. Atheists believe god IS NOT REAL, because we see NO proof. Show us proof and we would be really stupid to NOT believe. Some would say we are Atheists because we are NOT stupid. (I can see the smoke rising from Now-a-Saint, FromWithin, Bronto and a few others ;-))

That said, I do agree with the "damaging effects" of "you MUST" religions! Find me some factual proof and I'll let "god" blow in my ear.

Side: But you're right.
2 points

The GOD of the site, ANDY has started a clean up operation and I think there will be many who shall feel his wrath in the coming days.

Side: Okay...
0 points

God most likely doesn't exist. Prove me wrong.

You have no reliable method to determine the mathematical probability of a creator and subsequently no reliable method to determine what is "most likely".

This is me proving you wrong. Smell it. Taste it. Bathe in it.

Side: Okay...
Logically(192) Disputed
2 points

Simple logical reasoning can show how little the probably of a divine creator existing actually is. The fact that there are hundreds of proposed gods throughout history makes the one you may believe in specifically insignificant. Whatever religious beliefs you hold are most likely what you believe only because you were raised to believe it; as is the case with roughly 80% of religious believers. Also, speculating that I don't have a definite method of determining the probability, to a certain significant figure of a percentage, of a god existing doesn't change the fact that the likelihood is still very small. If you want to refute that, go grab me some evidence of a god existing.

Side: But you're right.
1 point

You have no reliable method to determine the mathematical probability of a creator

And neither do you. He wants you to prove that a god exists, so why don't you go ahead and do that?

Side: But you're right.
Quantumhead(733) Disputed
0 points

And neither do you.

But I didn't claim to. I said quite the opposite. In fact, it was the entire reasoning I used to debunk the OP's premise.

He wants you to prove that a god exists

Then why does the OP read, "God most likely doesn't exist. Prove me wrong", instead of, "Prove to me that God exists"???

Stop being silly.

Side: Okay...