Debate topic: The scientific method is useless. For the affirmative: scifes For the negative: GeoffP Rules of the debate: 1. Each debater will have 10 posts in total. 2. Dictionaries and other reasonable sources of authoritative definitions are to be taken as authoritative. 3. Each debater has 3 days from the time of the last post by the other debater to post his next response. If a debater does not post within this 3-day limit, he will be considered to have forfeited the debate, barring any mutual agreement between the debaters. 4. Supporting evidence for all arguments is required. Links: Proposal thread is here: [thread]106882[/thread] Debate thread is here: [thread]106965[/thread] Discussion thread is here: [thread]106991[/thread] scifes' opening post follows: ------ if God exists; his existence is the most important piece of information one needs to get. for then he will be all that matters, and everything else is worthless and pointless. if he doesn't exist, everything is worthless and pointless. if there is scientific proof for god, i'd like to hear it. and i admit my defeat here. if a methodology for acquiring and validating information can't reach the most important piece of information... and results in perceiving the world as worthless... then that methodology is useless. -------------------- the argument that god doesn't exist and so science is valuable for making our pointless life a better pointless life, can't be taken by g because he believes god exists.