Environment Debate Topics — page 6
625 debate topics, all ages. Debatable motions with arguments for and against. Open the arguments below, pick one at random, or present them full-screen.
- 251.
Piranhas and vultures should be euthanized
For
- fight me
- Piranhas and Vultures are very dangerous animals and has been human kinds natural enemy since the beginning of Earth. All though many animals of many different kinds attack us humans all the time, Piranhas and vultures seem to dangerous and useless to be able to live.…
Against
- Pro said that "Scientists should create a deadly chemical to release in the air that only kill vultures." and for piranhas "we should send bombs to only kill them." Not only is that an irrational action, it makes no sense. It would be very hard, if not impossible "to create a…
- People are not allowed to interfere with nature. That is a common Daoist belief but people in any religion would know that exterminating a whole race just for the sake of "them attacking us." My opponent stated that piranhas are useless, but they are part of the food chain and…
- 252.
Odd-even car rules will reduce Delhi pollution long-term
For
- Whether or not it is a political stunt is beside the point ( though I totally agree it is most likely probably 95% sure a political stunt lol ). It is about whether the program can successfully reduce pollution for the long run, which following logic it can/will if followed.…
- I agree on those points but it is that attitude that, ' he's not doing it so why should I " and " it only make a little difference why put in the effort " and " I don't want to be inconvenienced " is what has gotten a planet into such a crapper in the first place. If the Indian…
Against
- i do agree with some of your points but this 15 days trial is nothing more than a political stunt and i am sure that after 15 days Delhi government going to blame to central government for not supporting to this program for long time. Neither politician not public would follow…
- No doubt Idea is good but does not seem to be perfect to reduce the pollution level. This idea is better to reduce the traffic level and make Delhi Jam free. Because there are lots of exemptions provided by Government so ultimately after some time when public passion will come…
- 253.
Recycling programs are pointless
For
- I concede to your argument :) Well Done :)
- However, if you take into consideration the amount of money that is spent by companies during the recycling process and the amount of energy required to make the transformation of these recycled products into new products. Regarding your point on global warming, we are…
Against
- Oh :/
- First of all, let me outline and also remind you about the positive aspects of recyling. Recycling is securing the future of our children and grandchildren since it is reducing, land pollution, air pollution and water contamination. Not only is it helping us live a better life,…
- 254.
Overpopulation is an imminent threat we must prepare for
For
- Thanks, Con, for beginning this debate. We have a pretty small character limit per round, so without further adieu... Con begins by stating that he "doubts the probability" of overpopulation happening. Overpopulation is defined as filling with excess number of people, thereby…
- My opponent has been online in the last 3 days; in fact he was online 35 minutes ago (and I am posting this as soon as I saw that my opponent forfeited R3). Therefore we can assume that he concedes this debate, or at the very least, expresses bad conduct in not coming back for…
Against
- In light of many of these horror stories of overpopulation destroying all resources I have had doubt on the probability of this happening. Our society as well as many others. Ask these questions to yourself. 1. In today's (Anglo-American) culture will many women want to pursue…
- Thank you for your enlightening re-argument. //Con begins by stating that he "doubts the probability" of overpopulation happening.// I never said I doubted the probability of overpopulation happening. Overpopulation is destined to happen in the foreseeable future. I however do…
- 255.
Global warming is entirely caused by humans
For
- "Technically, only half of the planet would be roasted without CO2, while the other half is frozen, so I think we could both be right about that. Only half of the planet would be facing the sun at any given time. The atmosphere isn't actually thickening, though, it's the…
- For now, i drop most of the sources since its all coming from the same source. DEFENSE;*Slams desk* Actually, the CO2 is what keeps the heat in. It's called the greenhouse effect (1), the CO2 in the atmosphere is like the plastic wrap on microwaved leftovers. It lets the…
Against
- "The atmosphere has actually 2 effects on the warmth. The first one is that it reduces the warmth that gets inside earth, just as i said, we will be roasted if this didnt happen. The second one is that it keeps the warmth inside for a set period of time and then they will be…
- Thanks for debating with me. "Cant really refute this one, this one is true. If CO2 wasnt there, the atmosphere would be so thin, that we all would be roasted and life on earth would be impossible. But this argument says nothing about humans not causing the global warming.…
- 256.
Global warming is a man-made problem
For
- Ok, so I had an excessive amount of work to do and completely did not have time to post round two. Had my opponent extended arguments or done anything in his last speech he would have easily won the round. But since we both didn't do anything round two/part of round three, this…
- I will start off by giving a resolutional overview, give my case and address my opponents case. RESOLUTIONAL OVERVIEW. The resolution for this round is as following: Resolved: That Global Warming is a manmade problem. The pro burden in this round is clearly defined, show that…
Against
- I have nothing to say until my opponent posts his next argument. I do however have to use 100 characters, so I'll write a note saying that I have to use 100 characters.
- Okay, my opponent misinterprets my argument in his Resolution Overview. He claims that I say that global warming does not exist. To the contrary, I do not argue that the climate is getting warmer, I simply argue that it is natural for it to do so. Next, in his first contention…
- 257.
Electric cars are better overall than gasoline cars
For
- Safety For your section about safety and saying that electric cars are dangerous on the road, well that can happen to any car. Most cars have the same chance of being hit and being dangerous. For example look at the car company Toyota, they had a recall on a few of their models…
- Environment Well yes but, another hazardous coming from gas powered cars is pollution. 1.7 billion tons of CO2 get released from the tail pipes into the atmosphere according to the Environmental Protection Agency. CO2 is a greenhouse gas that can effect on the environment by…
Against
- Safety Other than the fact that smart cars are small they actually have high safety ratings. The ForTwo actually did well in the crash tests that were conducted by the independent insurance institute for Highway Safety and this has high tech front and side air bags to ensure…
- Price Even though the government might give you tax credit you're still paying a lot for your electric car. Electric cars run for about $40,000 to over $100,000 dollars, a decent gasoline car can cost as little as $10,000 dollars saving you a lot of money. Also the availability…
- 258.
The US ban on incandescent light bulbs was a good decision
For
- Rebuttal against my case: I would like to begin this round by obviously pointing out that my opponent had no time to actually rebut my case, but sort of make a case of his own, so for the time being, we can just extend my case across the flow. However, the solitary contention…
- Before continuing, I would like to point out that the ban on incandescent light bulbs refers to the clause in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 that bans incandescent light bulbs without a 25% increase in efficiency from production, importation, and marketing.…
Against
- To begin I would like to apologize for taking so long. Was busy, and needed to educate myself a little more on this subject. I would also like to ask my opponent to not vote for this debate. That is allNow to finish my argument.Brightness: I'm not sure if I am the only one, but…
- I will not be countering my opponents main argument so far and here is why: I completely understand that this ban will save energy, and, though I personally do not believe in Man-Made Global Warming, I understand it will help the environment, at least in energy saved. I do not…
- 259.
Global warming should be fought even if it is natural
For
- You're right, that if it were shown that there can be no goal-directed action (toward slowing/revering global warming {GW}) that is likely to succeed, then my syllogism would fail. I think you must have noticed that I didn't propose a single action yet - and that's why you…
- Why didn't you post an argument? I thought I mentioned in the last round that you should just start (I obviously did), but hey it's your turn and you obviously know what you're doing (good job on the record by the way). As for the observations (or are they objections? For 1 &…
Against
- ==Burden== --> My opponent concedes in his last speech that yes, the burden is to prove success in the desired goal. Because the resolution does state active verbs which imply an outcome. ==On-face Negation== --> As my opponent makes clear in his last speech and which was first…
- "But to clarify, the action also has to have some probability of actually working. It's not enough to just desire something, and then do something else" --> So the burden of the debate is clear. Weighing proability of success is a key component of judging the round. Namely…
- 260.
Solar farms will be economically viable within ten years
For
- This is partially inspired by the wind generation in 10 years debate that recently finished. I will propose a solar panel farm to be built in 2021 as a private company, not as a "cover an entire state, or nation" but merely to serve a particular community. My model will likely…
- Well, another forfeit. Let this misery end.
Against
- I shall accept the challenge to show that it cannot be done so soon. Begin.
- 261.
The United States should approve the Keystone XL pipeline
For
- I will keep this round brief because we are debating in circles and the same points keep arising. Con says it is unfair to argue the pipeline from the possibility of it being built in the future, and I think that statement is a fallacy. Merely due to the fact, the pipeline…
- The very first point I would like to point out is that Con never stated in the title or in any context before this debate that I may not argue this from a future perspective so I will continue to do so. He also states that I did not address any of issues directly which I…
Against
- Before officially starting this speech, I wish to invoke Rule 6 of Round 1. The final speech for both sides should serve as a closing statement with no new sources or new arguments (i. e. giving new funds to a source not specified earlier). With that in mind, let"s begin.…
- I wish to counter the points made by Side Pro in his first speech of the round. I will then elaborate upon my own points, fully crystallizing why Con is currently winning this round. I would also like to clarify the terms of this debate: this debate deals solely with the…
- 262.
Radiation levels should be included in weather forecasts
For
- Con stated "First off, Radioactivity and Cancer have nothing to do with weather, It's only environmental, Not natural". . . You sir have a lot of explaining to do. What's Environmental and what's not Natural. Please clarify.
- Given the increase in amount of Cancer cases reported by the National Cancer Institute. Radioactive levels should be included as part of News Broadcast Weather Report.
Against
- First off, Radioactivity and Cancer have nothing to do with weather, It's only environmental, Not natural. It doesn't matter how many people die from "Cancer" it has nothing to do with any weather forecast.
- First off, "You sir have a lot of explaining to do. What's Environmental and what's not Natural. Please clarify. " I didn't say that Radioactivity wasn't or isn't environmental, I only said that Cancer and Radioactivity has nothing to do with weather in general. Smoking a…
- 263.
The United States should aggressively pursue renewable energy for automobiles
For
- In the Seventies the United States reached "Peak Oil" Production. That incident resulted in the long gas lines of the seventies. We are now or has approached the "Peak Oil" production for the world supply of oil. As the sources, production and location of new oil diminishes the…
- My fellow American, In your rebuff of my argument you offer off-shore drilling as a solution. "That may be true, but what's stopping us from drilling off of our shores and in ANWR? It will not take 10 years, contrary to liberal talking points. Think I'm just pulling these stats…
Against
- My opponent concedes the debate with no retort to my arguments. Vote Con! Captain America PS:100 charachterssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
- And I ask you again, my friend, why can we not do both? Even if what you say is true, what is it going to harm to drill off our shores and in ANWR? "Off-shore drilling is not a solution. Using a a quote from one lone oil company will not reduce the price of oil. The Department…
- 264.
Human-caused global warming is significantly harming the environment
For
- detractors from MMGW man made global warming, who say it's not ssignificant, and only a hoax, usually rely on sun flares and volanoes. if you don't know what i'm tlaking about, then don't debate me. essential facts. one is that studies have shown that the sun cycles have…
Against
- Debating tips number 5: 5. Don't forfeit a round. Leave a simple sentence and expand on it later. Even if you don't have time to leave a full response, DO NOT forfeit a round. Forfeiting a round destroys your credibility and makes it less likely that voters will vote for you.
- Do not forfeit. Forfeits are bad. Got it? Otherwise, why are you even bothering to debate in the first place?
- 265.
Pipelines should be built despite environmental concerns
For
- No no, don't do that voters, Con's argument was atrocious- he had holes everywhere. I would argue that the whole "spill is likely" argument should land me the 3 points without me saying a word! And all the forfeit was was me letting Con vent, you don't interrupt a man when he's…
- *Yawn* Yea, me too.
Against
- My opponent has been unable to provide an argument, and I don't seem him intending to do so. Hence, unless my opponent is able to provide an argument, I encourage voters to give a 7 point vote on my behalf.
- Yawn...Extend all arguments.
- 266.
The US should mandate alternative-fuel vehicles by 2040
For
- I will first defend my case and then attack my opponents. Please note that in both cases, it may not necessarily be in the order my opponent lists his arguments, but in an order that I believe makes the most sense. I'll try to keep things clearly marked, but just be aware:…
- Government: Are you ready America? America: Aye-aye, government! Government (etc. ) I can't hear you. America: AYE-AYE GOVERNMENT! Government: Oh…what could kill our economy today? America: Oil dependency! Government: What do we need to solve for it? America: An alternative…
Against
- No, I don't take Sponge Bob seriously, I actually thought you were about to. :) Oil Dependency- As I would like to point out, Pro can at best solve for 40% of oil dependency, however, he fails to recognize that we will still be dependent on other countries for alternative…
- I believe Americans are smart, I believe that they will not fall for their fears of the status quo and submit to a Sponge Bob tune, he is a cartoon for crying out loud. That is incorrect, the facts are that currently the alternative fuels produce more CO2 then they reduce,…
- 267.
Sport hunting benefits the sustainability of wildlife populations
For
- Due to over hunting, 100 years ago the United states had a deer population of only 500,000 approximately. Thanks to our conservation efforts (which were mainly pushed into law by lobbying from hunters) today the deer population in the United States is estimated at 25 million.…
- Over hunting has caused a few species to go extinct, this is true. However, habitat loss is the number one cause of extinction. Humans ARE the top predator in the food chain, and the only predators who are capable of studying and understanding their impact on game populations.…
Against
- Though you say hunting game for resale is illegal, laws only stop the honest people. There are some who will hunt and sell what they kill for profit. Even if it is only a handful, they still exist. Also, people are watching and monitoring to make sure the balance stays, well,…
- Though hunting is regulated, it has still led to the extinction of many types of animals. Also, the top predators, in the food chain, need to eat more food to survive. So, without hunting, some will die from lack of food, keeping it in balance. Also, hunting may help feed us,…
- 268.
Corporate emissions should be taxed
For
- With the ever mounting concerns surrounding the global warming crisis, it is in the best interest of humanity that the next leader of the free world prioritizes effective policy making to cope with this. Obviously, our current administration has been useless in this regard. It…
- Needless to say this was not a debate, and four rounds of time needed to elapse for it to end. It's about time.
Against
- Recently, some politicians, most notably Barack Obama, have advocated taxing corporate gas emmisions. That is to say, the government charges corporations depending on how much pollution they emit. I was wondering why people, Obama supporters in particular thought of this and if…
- 269.
Earth will not remain habitable forever
For
- Where can we go next?? don't know just kidding
- Mother Earth is like a giant living organism made of many closely interrelated components. These components are constantly interacting to provide and maintain the circumstances necessary for survival. The microcosm and macrocosm have to work in unison to support life. From the…
Against
- I read to much, I am up to date with the idea Earth is on a time limit. But what is to say Holly wood has not already shown the way. Colonizing other worlds is going to happen and what is so impossible to think this is the real first earth? And what if the human race is already…
- 270.
Technology is a threat to the environment
For
- Technology is very much important for our life now.We use the output of science,technology in every sphere of our life to live better.But,on the other hand,technology is just distructive for our enviroment.
Against
- Please vote for me
- Please vote for me
- 271.
Deforestation does more harm than good
For
- I'm arguing that deforestation is a bad thing.
- I see my opponent has not learned to specify his argument. you stated that "deforestation is good (at least to human)" but you see the argument is not "is deforestation bad for humans" it is just is deforestation is bad. so lets look at the facts shall we. economical:…
Against
- Yes, sorry. Round 1 was acceptance. Now for Round 2. I want to thank Debatefox for accepting this debate. Here's what I have to say about deforestation: If you've ever played Minecraft, you would know that wood is probably the most important resource you can find. You need wood…
- I claim that deforestation is NOT a bad thing in today's society. Waiting for a Contender.
- 272.
Human activity is the main cause of climate change
For
- Climate change is most definitely real. 97% percent of the world's scientists agree on this, and its effects are already showing. It is most definitely real, and those who argue against it are actually people who make the energy that causes climate change. And if we don't…
- This will be a quick debate on whether or not (man-made) Climate Change exists.The debate structure will be as so: - Round1: Acceptance - Round 2: Main arguments - Round 3: RebuttalsThis means you can not reply to any claims during round 2 or provide any additional arguments in…
Against
- Climate change clearly does not exist, here are reasons why: (1) Exhaling Carbon Dioxide is no clear threat to our climate, we just breathe it out, our cars do it too (2) It is a conspiracy (3) There are no sources to back your statement up Here are my sources on how "Climate…
- I will be playing devil's advocate.
- 273.
Genetically modified crops should be banned
For
- There is no longer any legitimate, scientific defense of growing GM crops for human consumption. The only people still clinging to the outmoded myth that "GMOs are safe" are scientific mercenaries with financial ties to Monsanto and the biotech industry.GMOs are an anti-human…
- Definitions as said by dictionary. com Illegal: forbidden by law or statute. Crops: the cultivated produce of the ground, while growing or when gathered: the wheat crop. GMO: Genetically modified organism GMO is sick!
Against
- Arguments extended.
- As Pro bears the BOP, all that I must do is overturn his reasons for making GMO Crops illegal. This should not be a difficult process as there is very little actual argument to refute; most of his case is made up of fallacious appeals to emotion and other logical fallacies,…
- 274.
Global warming is real and we ought to do something about it
For
- Because I wasn't imformed you accepted I am very sorry. Global Warming is very real. We have three rays (probably more.) that come down to earth one very weak one stays down here. Now more are being stuck in here because of a layer built up of non-renewable energy. So it is…
- The last time I tried doing this I made the time way to short I accidently took to long to post my answer and it said I had dropped out so lets do this again. I believe that we should take actions by slowly changing from non-renewable energy to renewable energy. To keep…
Against
- you do a redo but yet you dont rebut my argument. why?
- i guess i agree with taking actions to slowly change but i dont think we should stop drilling until we completly drill it all up. i also dont believe we have any effect on global warming because the polar ice caps are 60 percent bigger than they were a year ago. everytime obama…
- 275.
Fish are important to the world
For
- Hello, I will now finish off theawesomeguy2 and win the debate. BTW, that guy copied my name, and he's a friend, so yeah. For my rebuttal of his first point, he stated that fish are completely useless. Not true! Fish help the economy, they help animals and the Eco-system, they…
- Hello. For my next two points, my first point is that fish affect the food chain. Think about it. Without any fish what-so-ever, what will dolphins, shark, and just about 300 more animals eat? Fish are one of the most important species in the world. For my second point, fish…
Against
- Hello. Time for me to post my rebuttal's and win. For my opponents first point, they stated that fish help the economy. Sure they do, but the economy wouldn't change that much if we lost the fish in the world. If it does, the government can just print of thousand of billions of…
- For my next two points, we don't need fish because if every fish in the ocean and seas died, we could take out all the water and make land for generations to come for humans. This is useful because everyone knows that humans are going to overpopulate. We could of also found…
- 276.
Deepwater offshore drilling is in the best interest of the United States
For
- Con has resigned from the debate he started.
- Thanks to Con for an interesting topic and timely debate. Every year 30,000 people in the United States die in automobile accidents. Autos pollutes and consume valuable resources. So shouldn't we ban automobiles immediately? No, of course we should not. The advantage of…
Against
- See comments
- We the con believe that offshore oil drilling is not in the best interests of the united states. Offshore oil drilling is destroying our delicate ecosystem. Additionally, at the same time it is causing our economy to plummet. Offshore drilling also destroys the overall health…
- 277.
America should expand nuclear energy production
For
- Second round is for contentions. Third round is for counter-arguments. Fourth round is for voters and clarification.
- He is the best opponent that I have faced. I will defend my case and then attack his. Argument 1: My opponent says that France as an example does notwork due to America having more resources and the three mile island incident. We import almost half of our oil. I would not call…
Against
- I will be arguing that America should not expand nuclear energy production May both of enjoy this debate and let's begin. P. S. I apologize for late reply.
- Closing Argument Americans are growing increasingly concerned about energy, and the growing problems with America"s energy supplies are further complicated by hostile and unfriendly nations which dominates the world oil supply. Coercive regimes, occasionally, employ energy…
- 278.
Global warming is not an urgent issue
For
- Sea level
- Many factors involved.
Against
- The scale of the problem
- Nature will adapt better than we will
- 279.
It is acceptable to let animal species go extinct
For
- ...lame
- Forfeiting is unacceptable, if anyone else wants to do this debate with me, let me know.
Against
- Pro will have the BOP while I, as Con will negate whatever he says. Thank you.
- 280.
Zoos should be abolished
For
- Not all zoos can be sizes of savannas so they must rationalize the amount of space given to each animal. So you must understand if a leopard can't get 12-30 sq. miles of space. But, zoos do have to divide that space rationally." No, not all zoos can be sizes of savannas, that's…
- "it's a different experience when you see an animal up close. " From my own experiences I'm most often unable to see the animals. They are often either hiding from the noisy screaming people flashing pictures, or there home is so small they have to choice to sit there are be…
Against
- Cruelty If there is one thing I can't stand, it has to be cruelty in general. Cruelty is unacceptable towards humans and animals. When I see commercials about animal cruelty, I always tell myself who has such a cruel heart that they could do that to an animal? Some zoos have…
- Not all zoos can be sizes of savannas so they must rationalize the amount of space given to each animal. So you must understand if a leopard can't get 12-30 sq. miles of space. But, zoos do have to divide that space rationally. God also told us in Genesis 1:26-28 that we have…
- 281.
All zoos should be banned
For
- i agree
- This house believes that we should ban zoos on global scale as it has been proved that animals in captivity live for less time than animals in the wild. Some zoos are also trying to conserve the animal and help it to regain its numbers however keeping animals in captivity is…
Against
- I am going to continue pretending that you have not submitted to my superior intellectual power. It is now time to rip apart your arguments. Your point about animals being proven to live for less time in captivity is completely false. Take the African Lion. In the wild it lives…
- This house believes that we should not even stop to consider banning zoos on a national scale, let alone a global one. This question is one that has been contemplated since the first menagerie in 3500 BCE yet we are still trying to figure out the answer. But, without question,…
- 282.
The US should require all new cars to use alternative fuels by 2040
For
- Thanks for continuing this debate. I must apologise...I have only minutes until the deadline expires. I am afraid, therefore, I will not have time to post an argument that his contribution deserves. Suffice to say that, my opponent made a number of valid objections to the…
- I really appreciate the being given the opportunity to debate a subject that relates to my favourite interest in life – cars – and I thank Russia very much for the invitation. Now, to respond to each point in turn: 1 – My opponent made a semi-valid point that all alternative…
Against
- 1. I do believe that my logic about "You see the problem is that the fuels need land and transportation and finally conversion, when these factors are included there is no reduction of CO2. " stands valid, my opponent although has yet to answer this point (Please don't make…
- I stand to negate the following once more (I read the agreement this time so I hope there won't be nothing I' do wrong this time): "Resolved: That, by 2040, the federal government should mandate that all new passenger vehicles and light trucks sold in the United States be…
- 283.
People should keep and eat the fish they catch
For
- True. I do agree with this statement, But if everyone replaced these lead bullets with lead free bullets, Then they can eat happily. People can also use bow and arrows to shoot. Also, I didn't specify which kind of shooting, It could be bow and arrows, Crossbows, Missile…
- Fish taste good. People taste good. --What else tastes good? Bananas. We should shoot and eat fish. This tastes good. --CON MAY STARTRules:There are no rules :)
Against
- If everyone replaced their bullets with lead free bullets, Then the animal shot would not die. Lead's poison contributes to their death. Bows and arrows are less accurate then just fishing for the fish with fake bait. Even bows and arrows I think contain some poisoned material…
- While people can eat fish if they want too (I personally don't like it), Shooting them and eating them is bad because it can increase lead poisoning which can cause you to get sick.
- 284.
Governments should not prioritize environmental protection
For
- "Let's see what the Con side will say. " Let me just say that you are the con side, I am the pro side, "We should protect the environment because humanity is responsible for that. " are we though? Should the environment be placed over the well-being of the people? "We should…
Against
- I'm writing this so that I'm not forfeiting.
- Thank you for responding. Let us just say that I am not wanting to stop electricity. What about smokimg? And can we decrease the amount of rubbish? We can also slow down the greenhouse effects. Well, You said you do not want people to lose jobs. But if the environment turns…
- 285.
Solar power is better than gas power
For
- Kirby Dance!!!
- You spelled win wrong. And by the way, I new I was going to win
Against
- I already know that solar will winn so good job Hummus123
- I already know that solar will winn so good job Hummus123
- 286.
Offshore oil drilling should be allowed
For
- Burden of ProofMy opponent takes the full burden of proof for claiming that drilling oil in ocean water and "carrying it" shouldn't be allowed.ArgumentCrude oil is used for a variety of incredibly useful things. Oil is converted to diesel fuel (petrodiesel), ethane (and other…
- Rebuttal"Well 1 good thing that may happen is it may stop the risk of pollution and million of animals dying"Keep in mind the massive negatives. We would have a shortage of this list of 144 items alone: http://www.ranken-energy.com...; "And ocean water and other water is used…
Against
- I said "possible" drinking water and if you have not watch news there are machines that filter out all the salt and parasites and makes drinking water but it does cost a lot of money. Water collects electricity so if lightning strikes the oil on a oil spill or drilled oil it…
- No because million of animals are dying and possible drinking water is being destroyed.
- 287.
Countries should work to halt global warming
For
- This is the final round of the debate, so I'm just going to go over some overarching themes and arguments as well as give my reasons for voting for me in this debate. Frauds and Poor methodology: Even with the provision of new evidence about China and South Korea in his…
- Methodology of surface station experiments: I'm not saying that my opponent's evidence is inherently faulty. He certainly brings up a good point. However, the conclusion that he comes up to doesn't make sense at all. The methodology of the United States is flawed, so every…
Against
- My opponents case goes as follows:1. Global warming is an issue (exists and is man made)2. Global warming causes disasters and hurts the economy. Now, my arguments on (2) proved environmental regulation bad. Further, (1) is the most important issue. If 1 is proven not to exist,…
- Fraud, methods My computer deleted my argument, so excuse me if my arguments are mainly quotes and me rushing, I will make a final appearance last round. "Regions of the world that exhibit significant warming over recent decades is likely the result of a robust urban heat…
- 288.
Earth Hour is an ineffective environmental campaign
For
- Thank you for your questions. I will focus on your question as to why earth hour is useless. Firstly, I recognize that Earth hour has good intentions in changing the attitudes of the people towards climate change. But those intentions are not actually realized. According to…
- Defintion of Terms Earth Hour is a worldwide event organized by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and held towards the end of March annually, encouraging households and businesses to turn off their non-essential lights for one hour to raise awareness about the need to take…
Against
- very interesting i must say. first off, i would like state that again, what do you propose to stop this? Its not like we can fine people for turning there lights off and using candles. And if they want to turn out there street lights, we can recommend against it and maybe force…
- I would first like to say, is this hurting anyone? And also, what is the point? You say this is useless, but do you know that for sure? What are your facts? Your prof that this is pointless? I would like to say that at this point anything to help the environment is worth it.…
- 289.
People should eat much less meat
For
- Thanks for accepting.l. Healthl.A. Kidney stonesA vegetarian diet reduces the percent chance of developing kidney stones. Kidney stones are most frequently caused by too much calcium oxalate or uric acid in the urine. Animal protein (including meats, shellfish, eggs etc.) have…
- Rules: 1. Polite conduct at all times 2. A picture or cartoon with every argument (just to be entertaining :D ) I will be arguing that people should eat a lot less meat or become vegetarian, Con will be arguing that meat is beneficial to the human diet. .. .
Against
- I accept.
- 1. Evolutiona) Humans didn't evolve to become pure vegetarians, our omnivorous attributes are found through out our bodies. The anatomical differences between the average veggie eating animal and our own species are quite apperent. The average adult human digestive tract from…
- 290.
Hunting should be outlawed
For
- *sigh* Oh well.
- Don't start debates you don't intend to finish.
Against
- Animals have no entitlement to any moral considerations, Therefore hunting is a fair, Moral, And justified activity.
- 291.
Breeding white tigers in captivity should be banned
For
- Breeding white tigers has no conservation value
- Nearly all White Tigers born in captivity are born with birth defects...
Against
- White Tigers are a miracle...
- Could this be seen as tiger racism?
- 292.
Human-caused global warming exists
For
- now con resorts to making up facts about the beliefs of scientists. 98% of scientists agree with me. if 98% of engineers said a bridge was unsafe, would you want to travel down it?
- we each have directly contradictory facts. my sources are reliable. yours are scattershot. plus 98% of scientists agree with me. if 98% of engineers said a bridge was unsafe, would you want to travel down it?
Against
- When it comes to scientists there are a total of 2,500 scientists that do believe in Global Warming, but when it comes to not believing in Global Warming there is a large amount that have signed a petition stating that they believe that Global Warming is a hoax. There is a…
- I'm going to extend across all of my other arguments as they have not been refuted. Contention 6: Global Warming Public Opinion First off, in a recent poll in the United States showed that 53% of Americans do not believe in Global Warming. (http://dailycaller.com...) In a study…
- 293.
The US should do much more to combat climate change
For
- What do you mean you cant just invest. The gov't has been doing that with oil for decades and you never complained. We need real energy soulutions for the modern world and need to stop guzzling on saudi oil.
- I like your point. However I think the Government should encourage wind and solar and invest in wind and solar when possible. I am not advocating for the government to get as involved as they are in oil or other forms of energy. But think about how much gov't is involved at the…
Against
- Go ahead and reread that "you can't just invest" in context.
- You can't just "invest" in Wind and Solar. You have to choose specific technologies and specific firms that make those technologies to invest in, and we all know how the government picks its investments.https://en.wikipedia.org... The connected will get the money, rather than…
- 294.
Technological advancement only harms the natural environment
For
- For clarification as well as an easier way to link the points, I will move down Con's layout.I don't see a link between the resolution and the burden stated, nor did Con provide any, so drop this point.Contention 1So my opponent gave an example of harming an individual to save…
- I'm sorry for the delayed response. But let's jump right into it.I can agree with most of my opponents definitions, but his definitions for lead and only are a bit vague so i will provide better definitions.lead- to serve as a channel foronly-inevitably, although unfortunate or…
Against
- I extend my arguments.
- Due to the back in forth Banter I will provide further explanations for why my case is true and why Pros resolution is false.My first point is that my opponent is arguing an absolute truth, an absolute truth is impossible to prove because one can not know how something was…
- 295.
Nuclear and fossil fuels are better than renewable energy
For
- There is far more available nuclear energy than there is renewable energy. Nuclear energy is way more efficient for less amount of land, therefore there is more nuclear energy than renewable energy in efficiency(1). Nuclear energy is produced from the reactions of elements that…
- Renewable energies do not produce nearly enough energy to support the United States. 91 percent of the United States is powered by fossil fuels and nuclear energy, while only 9 percent is renewable enrgies(1). Nuclear energy save s space in the long run. A 200 acre 1,000…
Against
- Renewable energy resources can produce more energy than fossil fuels and nuclear power since the process is continually replenished and is therefore recyclable.(1) There is plenty of space for hydro power, wind power, solar power, and geothermal power on our governments…
- Fossil fuels are not just dangerous because of the co2 released into the atmosphere causing climate change. When fossil fuels like gas and oil are spilled, destruction follows. Thousands of animals have been tortured and killed from an oil spill or leakage in their environment.…
- 296.
A carbon tax would successfully reduce emissions
For
- no brah it is good coz like the guy obama will make carbon cost money so big capanieaes have to pay and it will like, reduce pollution and stuff iz logical and u said some false stuff too try and work out what part so like yeah u suck and imma gonna win
- I'm sure you are waiting
Against
- AHA! I win this debate! BOOM BOOM!
- Brah, looks at this ya nub The carbon tax is "Seriously bad" Mulling over the mess we find ourselves in, it occurred to me that there are several other reasons (apart from those most frequently discussed) why a carbon [dioxide] tax is a very bad idea. The US economy is in…
- 297.
Humans have a moral duty to preserve biodiversity
For
- As this will be my closing argument, I wish to take the time to thank Belle for this debate and her pleasant conduct throughout. It is always refreshing, in my opinion, to experience a civil and intelligent debate without gratuitous invective and insulting tone. This was…
- First of all, I should like to extend my appreciation for Belle's thoughtful response in presenting her argument, and by "thoughtful" I mean to indicate that she seems to have given the issue considerable thought. But while I think she takes the issue seriously, I also think…
Against
- I already tried this once, but please... if you are not going to take this seriously then don't accept the debate. I actually think this topic is fairly interesting. "Biodiversity is the variation of life forms within a given ecosystem, biome, or for the entire Earth.…
- I would like to start off by apologizing for using the terms "moral obligation" and "moral responsibility" interchangeably. You are correct in assuming I meant the same thing by both phrases. Now, if I understand properly, my opponent's argument hinges on the idea that I have…
- 298.
Efforts to eradicate chytrid fungus should be pursued
For
- Chytrid fungus can be transported from place to place in water or mud, including on wet or muddy footwear. You can prevent spreading it by making sure to clean your shoes well and let them dry thoroughly between visits to different places. This is also true for anything else…
Against
- Well, unfortunately my opponent never offered an argument of his own. With this in mind, I have nothing to refute. Fortunately for me, I am still able to make my own argument as to why we shouldn't eradicate the chytrid fungus Argument: Killing is immoral. We know this because…
- I have good news. I just checked the whereabouts of my opponent. According to the website, my opponent was online two days ago, so I no longer have to worry if he/she has been consumed by the chytrid fungus. Hopefully, he/she will rejoin the debate next round!
- 299.
Humans are causing climate change
For
- I see little relevance with your graphs about humidity and such that has anything to do with the actual topic. But since round four is for conclusion only... And as always, thanks for debating. I have learned a lot and you seem like quite the genius. Though my stance on the…
- First off the arguments are not irrelevant. Second I would like to say that the fourth round will be a closing statement and no new points shall be brought up, sorry I forgot to say this in round one. Also I would like to point out my stance is specifically that humans…
Against
- The humidity graph had to do with the CO2/water vapor positive feedback loop you argued for in point 6 of your first argument. Thank you again.
- My opponent has not made a single argument for his position or a refutation of my arguments. His entire argument in round 3 is a source war (when the debate revolves around the number of sources each debater can put forth). Not only does it not satisfy his burden of proof, it…
- 300.
Overpopulation is a serious threat to the world
For
- I will first address the issue of deforestation. My opponent states that we are taking out approximately 4.5 billion trees a year but at the same time replanting many of the trees we cut down. This does not account for the reported contribution to carbon dioxide emissions.…
- In 2011, our population reached a record 7 billion (http://www.bbc.co.uk...). This estimate shows that our population is higher now than ever before. However, this does not make it unsustainable. In fact, our agricultural systems produce, "17% more calories per person today…
Against
- Pro. The Rounds held a 10k limit. This is the highest I could set it, but is the limit none-the-less. It's poor conduct to post well beyond the limit, and into the Comment Section. I will reply to as much as the 10k Limit allows for.----------------------------------This does…
- The Introduction is over. Argument starts now.--------------------------------------------------------------------Deforestation.Deforestation verb: To cut down and clear away the trees or forests from.1) http://www.thefreedictionary.com...What defines a problem is that it…
How to use these debate topics
- Vote, discuss, revote. Poll the room on the motion, give 5 minutes of discussion, then vote again and look at who changed their mind.
- Four corners. Label corners strongly agree → strongly disagree; people move, then each corner makes its best case.
- Switch sides. Halfway through, everyone argues the side they disagree with. It sharpens listening.
Run them live
Want every person to answer on their own phone, with a timer and a live leaderboard? Use these questions in an EngageSlide Vote · Discuss · Revote — free to start.
Tick questions on any page — your set is kept while you browse (or take the first 10 here) — and they become ready-to-play slides. What is EngageSlide?