CreateDebate


Debate Info

23
30
I believe the scientists. Pffft!
Debate Score:53
Arguments:54
Total Votes:53
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 I believe the scientists. (18)
 
 Pffft! (28)

Debate Creator

jolie(9805) pic



Here's what many scientists have to say about God.

I believe the scientists.

Side Score: 23
VS.

Pffft!

Side Score: 30
2 points

If you can't trust Heisenberg, who can you trust?

Side: I believe the scientists.
Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

I am pretty sure it is "uncertain" what is at the bottom of the glass. ;)

Side: Pffft!
2 points

You heathen ;)

Side: Pffft!
sauh(1106) Disputed
2 points

The only thing at the bottom of the glass is an order for a refill.

Side: I believe the scientists.
Jace(5189) Disputed
1 point

A scientist who actually studies pertinent subject matter, for starters...

Side: Pffft!
daver(1771) Disputed
2 points

To argue that QF has little to no pertinence, is rather an impertinent remark from someone who has nothing pertinent to say. Hmmmm

Side: I believe the scientists.
1 point

Like, quantum physics?

Side: Pffft!

I trust the scientists. ;)

Side: I believe the scientists.

I like this quote, but I don't know if this would be generally accepted.

Side: Pffft!
1 point

Particularly by the scientific body at large...

Side: Pffft!

Exactly. It's an interesting quote nonetheless, but it doesn't prove anything.

Side: Pffft!
1 point

Scientists are largely just successful Nerds. Do you want to accept the opinions of someone you would otherwise shun at cocktail parties?

Side: Pffft!
thousandin1(1931) Clarified
4 points

Better to glorify the mental traits that distinguish us from other animals, than to glorify those traits that can be easily surpassed by beasts of burden or machines. The nerds are the most human among us.

Side: I believe the scientists.

Scientists say what they don't understand;had this"Father" been alive today,he would have confused the meaning up;Not only are they Nerds but such intellectuals act in such dumb-driven manner that I do wonder if they are not the real starters of "Laughs for Gags".

Side: Pffft!
1 point

God is not waiting for us at the bottom of the glass, the only one waiting is the barkeeper waiting to refill it.

Side: Pffft!

The exact point;Probably this father is so intellectual that he sees the barkeeper as "God".

Side: Pffft!
1 point

Heisenberg is one scientist, whose work pertained to early quantum physics and was not especially directed at demonstrating the validity of God. He is hardly representative of "many" scientists, nor does his espoused view necessarily correspond with actual substantiation. The pro-god arguments I have heard from quantum mechanics define god so utterly differently than is commonplace as to render the claim fairly empty, and generally the diverge from the basis of actual evidence.

Side: Pffft!

This was what one fucking scientist said. This is not an accurate representation of the scientific community, I'm sure. If you believe it is, you are a fool.

Side: Pffft!
daver(1771) Disputed
2 points

You now stand in violation of the first of Ten Commandments of Rational Debate ("ad hominem").

Correct yourself.

Side: I believe the scientists.
1 point

Give him hell, Daver!

Side: I believe the scientists.
ghostheadX(1104) Disputed
1 point

I make the rules... I a god... therefore I can break them mofo!!!

Side: Pffft!

I tend to believe scientists. Cherry picking a single quote is intentionally twisting this debate from the start.

Side: Pffft!
1 point

You're just mad because it doesn't support your world view.

Side: Pffft!
PhilboydStud(79) Disputed
1 point

No, but I do find false dichotomies rather annoying. They're misleading.

Side: I believe the scientists.
daver(1771) Disputed
1 point

I'm sorry. I need your help in understanding how/why taking a position on a subject, citing a reference and then createdebating is somehow construed as twisting a debate from the start.

Your "cherry picking" and "single quote" statement seems at odds with Google reality as referenced here.

Side: I believe the scientists.
Jace(5189) Disputed
1 point

All of those people are long dead. Given the subsequent advances in the 50-500 years since they passed, I should think their opinions hardly relevant with respect to their scientific integrity.

Regardless, the point stands that presenting the belief of one scientist as representative of "many" scientists is a logical fallacy.

Side: Pffft!
PhilboydStud(79) Disputed
1 point

Perhaps I misunderstood the poster's intent, but here's what I got. A lot of scientists believe in god, and here's a quote about god from a famous scientist. Then you're given these two options: Do you believe the scientists are correct (god exists), or do you believe the scientists are wrong? The intent is to put anyone who claims to value empirical evidence over dogma in a dilemma.

Isn't this a false dichotomy? Just because one scientist made a philosophical-sounding statement about some cosmic god doesn't mean that all scientists believe in a god. Here's my list:

http://www.argumentsforatheism.com/famous.html (click the "Profession" heading twice and the scientists get sorted to the top.

Einstein seems to have had a spiritual side, but he did not believe in a Christian or Jewish god. He once called the Bible a collection of primitive legends that are pretty childish.

Side: Pffft!