There is sufficient evidence for the existence of super-ordinary actors on Earth.

Given that my opponent's resolution is somewhat obscure I will reword it slightly in order to clarify its meaning. ============= Proposed Rewording ============= --> There is sufficient evidence for the existence of supernatural agents or supernatural forces on Earth. I am quite confident that Eros will not object to this slight modification since he is very clearly referring to the supernatural. Moreover, this new wording helps clear up any confusion that may have accrued from the rather ambiguous term "super-ordinary actors". So, now that we have that taken care of I can move on to the substance of my argument. ======= Case Con ======= Contention 1: The Burden of Proof My opponent is arguing in the affirmative that there is "sufficient evidence" for the existence of supernatural forces on Earth. Therefore, he has a burden to produce this evidence. [1] And since this evidence has never been produced in the past he has quite a heavy burden. Either he is sorely misguided in this goal, or he has been holding out on the rest of humanity. Hmm… I wonder which it could be. Contention 2: The Scientific Method Science operates off of the scientific method in order to form accurate models of how things occur in reality. [2]-[3] And one of the things science does is make theories to explain various phenomena. Scientific theories are well supported by evidence and can make accurate predictions, as is the case with quantum theory. [4] Therefore, it is necessary for science to use evidence to validate its claims about the world. [5]-[6] However, to this date there has never been any piece of credible evidence put forward that would verify the existence of the supernatural. Indeed, all such arguments for the supernatural either rely on arguments from ignorance or are otherwise based on invalid logic. [7] Contention 3: Occam's Razor Occam's razor demands that we dispose of any unnecessary hypothesis. And it directs us to seek out explanations, which explain the most with the least need to make exceptions in their favor. [8] Since there is no credible evidence to verify the supernatural we can conclude that there is not sufficient reason to think that our world contains any supernatural agents. Everything we know about our world can be explained in naturalistic terms. It is, of course, true to say that there are gaps in our knowledge. However, these gaps do not indicate that mysterious supernatural elements are lurking at the bottom of the world's mysteries. ======= Conclusion ======= To this point my opponent has not produced any argument or evidence that would fulfill his burden of proof. Moreover, he has not identified which super-ordinary actors he claims to have evidence for. Therefore, the resolution is automatically negated up until this point. So, instead of attacking straw men I will allow my opponent to make his first real argument. Definitions: Supernatural: 1. Of or relating to existence outside the natural world. 2. Attributed to a power that seems to violate or go beyond natural forces. 3. Of or relating to a deity. 4. Of or relating to the immediate exercise of divine power; miraculous. 5. Of or relating to the miraculous. . http://www.thefreedictionary.com... Sources: [1] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] . http://plato.stanford.edu... [4] . http://www.thebigview.com... [5] . http://www.iep.utm.edu... [6] . http://plato.stanford.edu... [7] . http://www.iep.utm.edu... [8] . http://www.iep.utm.edu... Best, Freeman