Well, look at it this way. I take a coin, and to my eyes, it's perfectly round and flat. That is my truth, but only until I take a micro-measurement tool and find out that it's diameter varies through some micrometers, and it's actually 36.049 nanometers thicker at the bottom. Now that will be the scientific truth, and it will not be subject to debate, because there is no other way to make a more detailed examination of the coin.
If you take the Earth as an example, there's still a lot to discover, but we already know it's not a perfect sphere (a spheroid) and that it travels in an orbit around the Sun. Finding any other truth would take a new form of observation other than what we used to discover the previous one. Until our means of measurement are advanced enough to gather all the data we can, any point of view contradicting the existing proven one is a guess and has no power.
Therefore, no matter what arguments you wield in a debate that discusses a point, if they do not include observations by the most accurate means, the debate is pointless and will only provide an "educated guess" that may or may not have anything in common with the real truth.
Right now, I'm doing nothing but proving my own point, because I have no idea about the basics of philosophy or theories of debate, I'm basing my arguments on personal observations that are by far not the most accurate out there.
Edit: By the way, not only is it pointless, but it also is quite a blatant thread hijack. It's June 22nd, the game should have been out by now, any news, impressions?
[ June 22, 2007: Message edited by: Sean Mirrsen ]