Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.
Debra AI Prediction
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
  Considerate: 85%  
  Substantial: 59%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 85%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.1  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 49%  
  Substantial: 80%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.26  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 57%  
  Learn More About Debra
The OP turned this around by asking to prove the opposite: that the statement "god does not exist" is wrong. As expected, nobody has managed to prove it wrong, yet that did not lead religious people in this thread to conclude that, hereby, god does not exist.
We can see that many religious people use this fallacy selectively. They are okay with taking statements they like as truth based on inability to prove them wrong, but statement they do not like that also cannot be proven wrong they dismiss as false. Clearly they are not after logic here, but only after protecting their sacred beliefs.
  Considerate: 81%  
  Substantial: 95%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.92  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 34%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 88%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.98  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: only proof    creator   religion   proof  
  Relevant (Beta): 91%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 85%  
  Substantial: 83%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.12  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 76%  
  Learn More About Debra
Not at all. If what you said was true, then there would be statements that are simultaneously true and false. For example, I can make two mutually contradicting statements: "god exists" and "god does not exist". However, since I cannot prove either, by your assertion the implication is that both of these statements are false. However, it is impossible: if the first statement is false, then the second statement is true - hence, the second statement is fundamentally true and false.
Truth and falsehood do not depend on one's ability or inability to prove them; they are just there regardless of our understanding of them. I think what you are referring to is burden of proof, which is a slightly different thing: it states that when someone makes a claim, it is up to them to prove it right, rather than up to their opponent to prove it wrong. However, it does not have anything to do with whether the claim itself fundamentally is true or not.
  Considerate: 85%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.52  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 91%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.12  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
I think this is too strong a claim. If you cannot prove something, then, I suppose, I could say that you do not understand that something deep enough to prove it - and that is fine, otherwise why would you be interested in a discussion in the first place? - but it is not an indication that your claim is wrong. It really depends on the claim.
I can say that no human has ever been able to fly like a bird by using just their naked bodies. I cannot prove it, since, to do that, I would have to go through the entire history of every single human that has ever walked this planet, and that is obviously impossible - however, there is a very high chance that I am correct, based on what we know about human physiology.
Being unable to prove something does not in any way mean that that something is highly uncertain or likely to be wrong. It in itself merely says something about the nature of the statement.
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 96%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.62  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: entire history of every single human    high chance   human physiology.Being   planet  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
I think it's worth mentioning on behalf of @xlJ_dolphin_473 that "I think" the point he's trying to get across is that if you cannot prove your point...then you essentially have no proof of your claim and therefor your claim warrants no merit in regards to consideration.
@MayCaesar is making an excellent point that a lack of proof does not equate to being wrong in your claim. But @xlJ_dolphin_473
has an excellent point too and that is that, within the rational mind, if your claim warrants suspicion and you cannot prove your claim...your claim generally is disregarded as being worthy of consideration. It's not the same as being wrong but for the sake of the argument you really can't tell the difference between someone reacting to you being wrong vs reacting to you being unable to prove your point.
"There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".
"Oh, you don't like my sarcasm? Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".
  Considerate: 86%  
  Substantial: 88%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.98  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 83%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 85%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.42  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: entire history of every single human    high chance   human physiology.Being   Kepler-62f claim  
  Relevant (Beta): 69%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 87%  
  Substantial: 88%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.34  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 77%  
  Learn More About Debra
I'm really tired of the notion and the lack of intelligence involved in the process of asserting that God is effected by a ludacrous statement.
1. Human existence is de Novo
As existence and human existence must
result from an initial cause. There can not be an infinite series of causes for human existence as humans would never begin to exist without God having existed.
God's existence is not de Novo therefore God's existence is natural.
Anyone well studied in epistemology and ontology can easily understand two things immediately.
God exists and God is Jesus Christ.
The ontological quality of being or Human existence is fundamentally impossible without a creator with creative force.
Science was the result of the assertion of epistemologys assumed failure
Science can not be an empirical means of study because it can not evaluate the cause of human existence.
Theory and religion have the exact same meaning
Deep contemplation or thought associated with origin
Science is a religion.
Someone can be fundamentally certain evolution is false because of initial invariability and simply because
nothing can not
Nothing can not be
Nothing never was
Nothing ever is
This idea that God existence is illogical is .
God's existence is fundamentally logical.
Unitary arguments of existence fail miserably in the evaluation of their logical IMPROBABILITY.
Something can not be improbable and possible.
If I have no red beads in a bag the statistical probability of pulling a red beads out of a bag are 0.
Nothing can become from a null condition.
Religion is false
Evolution is a religion therefore evolution is false
This is just a basic understanding that Jesus Christ God exists.
God exists and it is self-evident because of a dependancy to exist.
What is wrong with you people? How do you not understand?
None of you have ever studied ontology, or epistemology to understand that God's existence is a necessity and as a necessity because we exist God Jesus Christ must exist. This is not rocket science
  Considerate: 53%  
  Substantial: 83%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 88%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.5  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: Human existence    de NovoHuman existence   empirical means of study   series of causes  
  Relevant (Beta): 40%  
  Learn More About Debra
Which is to say existence is the result of the Initial existence and cause of every existence that is the result of God's Jesus Christs creation
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 61%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 89%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.72  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: result of the Initial existence    Existence   dependant condition   cause of every existence  
  Relevant (Beta): 52%  
  Learn More About Debra
**** God's existence is not de Novo therefore God's existence is natural
Your whole argument is riddled with fallacies and to be frank utter nonsense , regards your god claim .....
One type of fallacy is special pleading. Special pleading involves a person applying rules and standards to others while exempting him- or herself. In addition, with special pleading, the person does not provide a logical reason for why he/she should be exempt from the rules or standards.
  Considerate: 56%  
  Substantial: 87%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 86%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.4  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: God's existence    special pleading   JesusisGod777888   whole argument  
  Relevant (Beta): 54%  
  Learn More About Debra
"It is not strange...to mistake change for progress."-Millard Fillmore
"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities."-Ayn Rand
"To disagree, one doesn't have to be disagreeable."-Barry Goldwater
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 85%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.38  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: point of view    religious people   absolute claim   conclusion  
  Relevant (Beta): 93%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 88%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.66  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: point of view    religious people   absolute claim   conclusion  
  Relevant (Beta): 81%  
  Learn More About Debra
There is plenty of proof that God does not exist. There is however no proof for God existing.
  Considerate: 87%  
  Substantial: 84%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.98  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: point of view    religious people   absolute claim   plenty of proof  
  Relevant (Beta): 86%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 68%  
  Substantial: 91%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.16  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: rules    human imagination   theory of our first grandparent   possible explanations  
  Relevant (Beta): 90%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 90%  
  Substantial: 71%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.96  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: big bang    different shapes   Evolution   planets  
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 75%  
  Substantial: 92%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.94  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: time life    rules   big bang   human imagination  
  Relevant (Beta): 80%  
  Learn More About Debra
I never said you're wrong, but you are taking your explanations from the middle of the road not from the very beginning, is what I'm trying to say.
  Considerate: 91%  
  Substantial: 87%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.84  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: big bang theory    first place   Evolution   place  
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
"It is not strange...to mistake change for progress."-Millard Fillmore
"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities."-Ayn Rand
"To disagree, one doesn't have to be disagreeable."-Barry Goldwater
  Considerate: 85%  
  Substantial: 62%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 4.8  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: simple logic    proof   theories   god  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
Very complicated systems can arise over time from complete chaos. And there has been a lot of time. It is hard for a human to imagine the timescales we are talking about, because of how negligible our own lifetime is compared to them.
Think about it this way... Imagine someone watching a movie about the Universe, from the beginning to its end, at a highly accelerated speed: 10,000 years in the Universe correspond to just 1 second of the movie.
In this movie, your life is less than 10 ms long; no commonly used video format is sufficient to register that even in one frame, so your life will not even appear in the movie. This is how brief it is on this scale.
Do you know how long this movie is going to take to watch completely? Two and a half years.
On such insane timescales almost anything imaginable can happen somewhere in the Universe. There is absolutely no need to introduce god into the equation.
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 84%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.46  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: half years.On    video format   second of the movie   complicated systems  
  Relevant (Beta): 66%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 85%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8.38  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: big bang theory    first place   chemistry of our body   Evolution  
  Relevant (Beta): 82%  
  Learn More About Debra
As I mentioned in previous arguments, proof is evidence. Evidence is required for belief. Proof drives belief. The theories have proof whereas for god there is no proof. Only from the one who wrote the book which is not that trustworthy. As proof drives belief I would believe in the theory which has greater proof which are the big bang or some other non-religious sub-theories.
  Considerate: 80%  
  Substantial: 73%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.8  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: big bang    Proof drives belief   lots of theories   proof  
  Relevant (Beta): 82%  
  Learn More About Debra
There's proof GOD, god, or God exists. You just mispronounce the numbers 400, 11, and 500 as letters in your interpretation. Funny that the issue is about prejudice yet not all discrimination is addressed.
  Considerate: 82%  
  Substantial: 52%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 89%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 8  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: proof GOD    issue   prejudice   discrimination  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 59%  
  Substantial: 69%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.26  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 39%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 72%  
  Substantial: 61%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 89%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 7.32  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: proof GOD    numerical values   issue   algebra  
  Relevant (Beta): 89%  
  Learn More About Debra