Science Debate Topics for Students — page 10

1,043 debate topics, students. Debatable motions with arguments for and against. Open the arguments below, pick one at random, or present them full-screen.

StudentsDebatePage 10 of 21

451.
NASA funding should be drastically cut
For
Although NASA once consumed a lively chunk of the federal budget (like over 5% in the 60's) you are correct in assuming that it no longer eats up very much in the grand scheme of things. Neither does funding a major hospital in Tampa. Neither does the Senate's salaries. Neither…
I have in no way stated that some benefits have been reaped from the space program in the past such, the most prominent example being the advanced satellite network that currently allows for better weather predictions, better television, better spying, and a variety of other…
Against
Research from NASA could eventually save the human race as we know it. Unforeseen things could come along that NASA may have the technology to combat. It is a gamble, but a gamble that has provided us with so much innovation thus far. It is a great program and it should not be…
I can totally see your point with America needing to focus on the home front rather than on the space frontier. Yet, I totally disagree with you. You talk about the need to cut back funding because of our budget deficit as well as social programs etc. But, you fail to realize…
452.
There is reasonable cause to doubt common descent
For
1. It doesn't matter if it proves Natural Selection. I'm a firm believer in Natural Selection. My position is not that Natural Selection is false, nor am I arguing that Common Descent is false. I am only arguing that there exists at least one reasonable cause to doubt Common…
Firstly, let me say to you Con that I'm sorry you aren't amused. Let me just point out that you aren't alone, because the Kiwis aren't amused either: As for your concerns regarding my knowledge of the Theory Of Evolution, I have to say that they are unfounded. Thanks to…
Against
In my last round I cited a yeast study as proof for the next step in common descent. Here, I would like to say I agree with my opponent that they are still single cells acting together, but they are acting in unison and rely on each other. This acting in unison is seen in most…
My opponent has said that all his evidence holds and that he is not wasting my time. For this reason, I will answer the claims by reference to his comments and by looking at the sources cited. As such my rebuttals are numbered according to the sources cited by my opponent.1)…
453.
Humanity is likely to face mass extinction
For
So before I began, thank you to whom excepts this debate. Doomsday or 2012 is now a little less than 3 years away and people across the globe are getting ready for whatever comes. Nuclear war, global shift, meteor strikes, hypercanes anything can happen and those of you who…
Against
Main Entry:waste Part of Speech:verb Definition:spend or use without thought; dwindle Synonyms:atrophy, be of no avail, blow, burn up, consume, corrode, crumble, debilitate, decay, decline, decrease, deplete, disable, disappear, dissipate, divert, drain, droop, eat away, ebb,…
Etc...
454.
Cloning plants and animals will be beneficial
For
"You start by mentioning that there is a similarity between the anatomy of a pig and that of a human. This much is true. But to jump from that to stating that pigs should be cloned for transplants is a huge leap. Although there has been talk of xenotransplants for over a…
It's true, the benefits of cloning do outweigh the risks. Before you accept my challenge, please know that human cloning does not play a role in this debate. This debate is about the cloning of plants and animals alone. Now, for my starting arguments. -Studies have shown that…
Against
Anyone that wishes to research the subject can see that clones should not be used for either xenotransplants or to replace trees. In xenotransplants, very few of the transplants are successful with regular, natural, healthy animals. Using a clone that will have a huge amount of…
You admit that very few xenotransplants are successful. But then you ask "But do you see another way of [getting] these 180,000 people working organs, when the numbers of organ donors are steadily decreasing?" I think the key phrase in that question is "working organs." No…
455.
Space existed before the universe came into existence
For
Con's argument is completely destroyed in their opening statement. With a complete disregard and fundamental misunderstanding of definition. From the Oxford Dictionaries. Concept: An abstract idea. Abstract: Existing in thought or as an idea but not having physical or concrete…
Theory is not proof of anything. Space is an intangible reality that we are all aware of. Time is an intangible reality that we are all aware of. SPACE Your definition: Space is a boundless three dimensional extent in which objects and events occur. Essentially, not just the…
Against
Underview Who had more convincing arguments? The answer: Con. Pro had the entire burden of proof in this debate, and failed to fulfill it. Vote Con on arguments for the following reasons: (1) Pro says the universe's existence is "supernatural" because knowledge is impossible…
OverviewVote Con because Pro fundamentally misunderstands basic concepts in physics such as the meaning of "space," and the distinction between a "vacuum" and "space," and because they've failed to respond to any of my arguments adequately.(1) Extend my definitions of "space"…
456.
Scientists should continue researching string theory
For
even though it is flawed we can research a way to research it. and also if you believe in god or any religion that si a flawed theory to so i hope you don't
it should be taught even though it is dead
Against
my job is done
Yes we can do more research on it but it will be useless in the end because scientists can't test out this theory (yet). Anyways scientists still haven't found any 'strings' to gather data from, even if we find these 'strings' it would take a lot of energy to uncurl them. First…
457.
IQ tests cannot accurately measure a person's intelligence
For
"When you debate online, you have to mention specifically what you are debating. You did so, but then changed what you wanted to debate in the middle. " When I brought my claim/credibility comment, I was not changing my resolution- I was explaining my resolution. The entirety…
I am not arguing about what the IQ tests claim that they can measure, but rather about their credibility regarding those measurements. To this I will bring my contentions.' -That is not what you said. -You said: 'I will argue that IQ tests cannot assess a person's intelligence,…
Against
ben-gurion has argued successfully this: "I am not arguing about what the IQ tests claim that they can measure, but rather about their credibility regarding those measurements. To this I will bring my contentions. " But that is not the resolution/what we are debating about.…
You simply don't understand. When you debate online, you have to mention specifically what you are debating. You did so, but then changed what you wanted to debate in the middle. You cannot do that. I have proved what you said originally as false, therefore the resolution is…
458.
Space exploration is more important than global affairs
For
This being my first debate, I'd like to start out with an issue that is the most pertinent to me, Space Exploration. I define Space Exploration to be: "The exploration of the cosmos for organic and sentient life, and for the prospecting of future planets and miscellaneous…
Against
Unfortunately my opponent has forfeited the entire debate. Please extend my argumens, thank you.
Unfortunately my opponent was not able to post a round in time; please extend my arguments.
459.
Pi is the most significant number in mathematics
For
Thank you for defining significance, this makes things much simpler. Since you defined significance as the most needed number then that would suggest that a significant number would be frequently used. It is well known that pi has been often used to find dimensions of circles…
Your opening statement is invalid for two reasons: You did not define significance, therefore your statement is up to interpretation You supplied no reasons confirming that pi was not significant, you only provided examples of other numbers To remain fair, I will only use the…
Against
Significant meaning the most needed number, or the best number.Pi is significant in circles, but what about pentagons and pentagonal stars: then we need phi. And with squares, we need sqrt(2). I don't see why circles are more significant than squares and pentagons. And phi is…
π is not the most significant number. I get the thing with the circle, but there is also e, which is the limit of (1+1/n)^n, and the derivative of e^x is itself. τ is equal two 2π. Also, φ is equal to .5+√(1.25), and we have i which is √(-1), which reminds me, 1 is pretty…
460.
Natural selection cannot fully explain biological complexity
For
In this round we shall be defending our arguments. I ask Con not to posit any further rebuttals as I would be unable to respond to them in this debate as this is the final round. My Defense of Natural Selection's Limitations The resolution clearly concerns the power of natural…
Your first claim in round 1 is a bit confusing. You said, "The notion that 'traits' are selected is a misunderstanding of the nature of evolution." Is not natural selection a primary mechanism for evolutionary change? And does not natural selection "select" traits based on…
Against
NS = Natural Selection Pro has stuck to the same points throughout this debate and though I've addressed each of them, Pro hasn't actually rebutted my arguments. Pro asserts that I'm not defending NS, which is completely misguided, and I feel that Pro is either ignoring or…
NS: Natural Selection My claim was merely that our idea of a 'trait' is subject to interpretation, where biology goes into more complex steps and doesn't recognise 'traits' but what causes them, while we consider things we see a trait and don't think about what goes on in the…
461.
Extraterrestrial seeding of life is as plausible as creationism
For
A few responses to begin. >> "However, my opponent decided to change the debate. He says in his first paragraph that "by "equally plausible" [he] simply mean[s] that they are possible, and not logically incoherent... [He] just [needs] to demonstrate that they are each viable…
Bah - my worthy opponent opens with a semantic argument that I had forseen, but dismissed on the assumption that nobody would attempt to prove degrees of equality. By "equally plausible" I simply mean that they are possible, and not logically incoherent. This is not a debate…
Against
My opponent is a great debater. However, at least for this round, he seems a bit confused. He has failed to prove the topic because of his confusion: he conceeds and openly accepts points that destroy any possibility of the topics validity. First of all, let me reiterate the…
My opponent is a clever one, for he has cleverly shifted outside of our original topic of debate. We are supposed to be debating that "the theory of extraterrestrially seeded life is EQUALLY plausible with creationism." However, my opponent decided to change the debate. He says…
462.
Humanity should genetically modify future generations
For
That is what i am saying! we can not!
Okay, so if you think you should clone yourself you are wrong in a million ways because then this world would be to crowded. yes there is mars but its just not a good idea, trust me. if we just constantly keep going like this then we could be homeless, less jobs, less houses,…
Against
Extend.
Let me walk this through with you. .. The resolution is: 'Should we genetically modify the future? ' However, it is impossible to genetically modify the future. If PRO meant for the resolution to be: 'Should we genetically modify in the future? ', he/she mentions cloning,…
463.
Macroevolution has effectively stopped in humans
For
con cites an obscrure study about retrotranssposons as if that study says we are evolving. id challenge con to say what that study means, and explain it better. it just looks like there might be minor genetic deviances still occurring, which i never contested. con says humans…
we won't be developing into another species, or getting significantly altered due to evolution. remember, evolution is where the weak die and the only those that live to copulate further their genes. changes in specific animals don't cause evolution... eg, you can't cut your…
Against
I am going to address your points out of order, because I would like to go through them in order of importance. What Are We Debating? In PRO's final paragraph this round, she wrote, "i didn't say evvolution [sic] has stopped, or will never occur again. " This may be the case,…
PRO has claimed that Homo sapiens will not evolve into a different species, AND that we will not be significantly changed as a result of evolution. As PRO holds the burden to demonstrate these assertions, I will begin with a general overview of how I think she is mistaken, and…
464.
In science, laws are stronger explanations than theories
For
Sadly I am not able to withdraw. I am sorry for wasting the debate space. I had prepared an argument(that I think is wrong, but it was a bit viable) in case you tried to hold me to the fact that I accepted, but you were quite gracious in this circumstance. I thank you for that.
I thought I was accepting as con, I often get mixed up when someone posts a title that is the opposite of their position. I do not agree with the proposition and cannot un-accept, but I can try to play devil's advocate even though the words are literally defined such that the…
Against
If you know of a way that I can delete the debate, I'll do it. If not, I guess we'll have to just have to let it play out. I'll not bother to argue my position.
Round 1: Definitions and acceptance. Round 2: Opening arguments from each side. Rounds 3 and 4: Rebuttals and new arguments. Round 5: Rebuttals and recap of each side's arguments. No new arguments. For this debate, the following definitions will be used: Fact: In science, an…
465.
Endogenous retroviruses confirm common ancestry among species
For
Yet again, my opponent has failed to address the topic at hand! My opponent CLEARLY stated that he doesn't know anything about ERVs, and the ONLY thing he can say about evolution is that HE doesn't think it's possible! His entire argument is an argument from ignorance. ***…
.. I also want to point out that my opponent did not even address the resolution of my debate: ERVs confirm common ancestry. As a matter of fact, during my opponent's entire argument he did not mention ERVs even once! So all of my arguments on ERVs still stand and they carry…
Against
The very words you speak are impossible to know if they are true. You say we are related to a banana, but you do not know that. This may sound a bit iffy but it is also true. I can simply say "were you there?" By saying no would make your claim unstable just like that. By…
Ok I am sorry to spoil it, as in I do not know a lot on Endogenous Retroviruses. However I can say that I am quite obvious that people would come to think that DNA is similar in great apes than it is in us. This is so obvious when people are blinded from the existence from a…
466.
Genes matter more than environment in determining human quality
For
For some ignorant reason, Pro has decided to start out by labeling my side the communist socialist side. I can not imagine how Pro concludes that, but for the record in this debate it is not being defended by a communist or a socialist. I am a Capitalist and very conservative.…
there are 2 factors which determine human quality. what is human quality? human quality is capability of invention or creative capability and it also includes talking, walking, look like a human.why these are called human quality? because only human being behaves like this in…
Against
Arguments extend. vote Con if for no other reason than Pro forfeited, but comment and let me know if you all think I should win this debate had it flat out been set to end at round 2. I kind of gave a closing argument anticipating this would happen then.
http://www.youtube.com... I apologies for any miscommunication caused by my spelling and grammar errors. My mistakes are much more visible to me when re-reading my case quoted in large bold letters. I was not accusing you Pro of wasting character space, I was defending that I…
467.
Young Earth Creationism is incompatible with cosmic evidence
For
What this debate entails:This will be a debate on the validity of Young Earth Creationism, or YEC (http://en.wikipedia.org...). This will be a debate not on the definitive age of our universe as proposed by scientists (which varies only slightly relative to the times which are…
Thank you for accepting. This is a Scientific DebateThe readers will see that this is a scientific debate. The reason YEC is applicable is because it is making a scientific claim as to the age of the earth. You will note that my opponent has used half of his time explaining how…
Against
Science and Theology: a) I have not brought 'theology' into this debate of science. You are the only person who brought a criticism of theology up in relation to a single scientific fact. So in as far as the Science you brought up is being used to challenge the logical validity…
I like how you have decided to keep this debate short and focused on one argued point, giving just 2 rounds, which is just enough to debate your one single argument. I accept this challenge and defend that YEC is not irreconcilable with what we know about Science and the…
468.
Evolution by natural selection is false
For
Evolution is false please watch this video http://www.youtube.com...
the reason why I say Evolution is false is because Evolution say's a fish can turn into a monkey but a fish dose not have the voice of a monkey and Evolution says a monkey can turn into a fish but why don't we see sea monkeys under water evolution says a rock Turned into a Fish…
Against
I see that my opponent's account is back online. I have messaged him asking if he wishes to continue this debate.
My opponent is no longer a member on debate.org... He decided to leave because the site owner wouldn't strike his 100% loss rate from the record.
469.
Creationism is more believable than evolution
For
Atheists seem to believe that the world just magically appeared. They have no prove of it. In the Bible, they clearly state what happened.
According to Pro's narrow scope of "evolution" pertaining to only "living organisms " during the history of the earth," and with Con's belief in the existence of a God. This debate has nothing to do with proving the existence of a God. And with that said, Con is a Athiest who…
Against
I'd like to start out with definitions. All definitions are from . http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...Atheism -Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. Creationism - The belief that the universe and living orgaisms originate from specific acts of divine…
Pro said - According to Pro's narrow scope of "evolution" pertaining to only "living organisms " during the history of the earth," and with Con's belief in the existence of a God.I'm going to assume this was a typo, because I am con, and my opponent is pro. This debate has…
470.
The simplest living cell was intelligently designed
For
My opponent is still attempting to straw man my arguments by collectively referring to them as Intelligent Design. The resolution is, "The most basic living cell was Intelligently Designed". The method used to come to this conclusion is Inferred Design. A top-Down approach to…
I instigated and have the burden of proof. My opponent has not addressed the points I put forward. He did not defend the circular logic being used to deny the evidence, in point 1 of round 1. Nothing in my first argument was for Intelligent Design, which holds to probability…
Against
Thanks Pro.I. Preface:The distinction between inferred design and (traditional) ID is understood, but given that no argument was made for the ID of life, which the title of this debate specifies, I proceeded to provide my own arguments. And from Pro's second round arguments,…
Thanks Pro.I. PrefaceStrangely enough Pro has not taken the opportunity to state his case for intelligent design(ID), I am sure that he will present his case in earnest in the next round, but for now he has not satisfied his burden of proof at all.II. Why Intelligent Design is…
471.
Physical reality is probably fundamentally timeless
For
I will be arguing that change and time are not fundamental aspects of physical reality, and they are are most likely just emergent illusions that observers within the universe experience, while ontologically; reality is static and unmoving.
I disagree with a couple of things my opponent said, but I guess it doesn't matter; he conceded.
Against
I accept.
I didn't really understand his mainpoints introduced in R2, as I wouldn't be able to respond to them. I'll try to get a better understanding of quantum. OH! Should've asked Pro this in the previous round, but what is quantum?
472.
Nikola Tesla was a greater scientist than Stephen Hawking
For
I know what a singularity and all that is, and I can tell you that it is unprovable, if it is unprovable, it is not science. Science is making observations, then making a conclusion, your conclusion has to be provable, if it is not provable, the "research" goes out the window,…
1). We already knew black holes existed. 2). Einsteins relativity was already proven. 3). We already knew the universe has no boundaries.
Against
For argument's sake, let's pretend you're right: Stephen Hawking never made any important contributions to science, and his list of achievements is small and petty compared to Tesla's. Does that prove that Tesla is smarter than Hawking? No, it doesn't. Being smarter does not…
You "measured it on their achievements"? So you think people who are "smarter" will necessarily achieve more? That's not true. Your argument that Tesla achieved more, therefore Tesla is smarter than Hawking is just plain wrong.Furthermore, who gets to decide what counts as an…
473.
Everyone should have a chance to travel to Mars
For
As you can see, this debate has come to an end by a forfeit. I extend all arguments.
Opening: I plan to prove that while completely untrained civilians wouldn't be appropriate, I will argue that the chosen applicants will be able to do the task with relatively basic training, such as two years. Rebuttals 1: They may not know now, when they first apply on the…
Against
First I want to start my argument with the describing the current candidate selection model. As their website stated, there will be 4 rounds in the selection process. First round; a list of candidates chosen from the application list base on their video and application form.…
For challenger who may not know what Mars-one is, Mars one is an organization which plan to send human being to mars in by 2023 and establish a human settlement outside Earth. . http://applicants.mars-one.com... I believe the Mars One Project was a great idea and a big step for…
474.
Subjectivity is essential to scientific inquiry
For
"When a discovery is made that does not favor the discoverers belief that was held prior to the discovery, it will not be claimed." This seems a common complaint, and reasonable concern for ethics. An ethical scientist may collect data that does not support his hypothesis and…
The act of forming a hypotheses is highly subjective. Asking the question starts with opinion and personal judgment's. Defining the scope, or procedures can be described as subjective as well. Science begs for subjectivity. When observations run counter to a hypothesis, while…
Against
Your welcome
"The act of forming a hypotheses is highly subjective. Asking the question starts with opinion and personal judgment"s. Defining the scope, or procedures can be described as subjective as well. " This why subjectivity is damaging to science. The question "How can i prove this…
475.
Biblical creationism has enough evidence to be considered a scientific theory
For
The Pro position officially recognizes Romanii (Con) for his kind conduct, for he posted a link to my arguments when I was having some complications with the character limit (instead of taking advantage of my forfeit). When voting, please under "who had better conduct" put it…
| Discussion on Topicality | The definition is arbitrary I know you disagree, that's the point. For if I bring up 10 evidence, then you'll disagree with it and say you don't think it is enough… Over and over, as it would be like arguing with a rock on the matter. But what if we…
Against
Due to an unfortunate, unseen complication with character limits (see comments section), Pro had to forfeit his last round.In order to allow for the continuation of the debate, Pro has posted his argument in the following web document:https://docs.google.com...INTRODUCTION…
I was planning on formatting my arguments as if they were addressed to the voters. However, my opponent has chosen to address his arguments directly to me, and as such, it is proper that I change my format to be directly addressed to him as well.DISCUSSION ON TOPICALITY"if I…
476.
The Big Bang created the universe
For
I think the real question is, what created God? You say that something can't be made out of nothing. If that was true, how did God come to exist? While the theory of the Big Bang has not yet been fully proven, neither has the existence of God. There are things in this world…
Your second statement should end in a question mark, since it's a question (rhetorical or not). Before I continue, let me explain what the Big Bang theory is. The Big Bang theory "is the prevailing cosmological model for the universe from the earliest known periods through its…
Against
After reading your statement, I looked at your last link (describing the perfect vacuum), I would like to point something out. It says that this perfect vacuum needed to be in existence to create the universe. The Big Bang theory doesn't explain how this perfect vacuum started.…
The Big Bang theory doesn't make sense. First off, how can nothing blow up. If nothing could blow up, the world would be on fire right now. Second, it is scientifically proved that you can't get something from nothing. If you could get something from nothing, then there…
477.
Evolution is a better explanation of life's origins than creationism
For
Your beginning is fair enough, and I agree wholly with your definitions. They both appear to be correct to me. In response to your question that you asked to be answered before my refutation of your other three points, I do agree that they could be proven true. However, I do…
You said that you would defend your position, so let's have this debate. I am of the opinion that evolution is the only viable explanation for life on earth. You say that creation is the only viable option and is the only option supported by observable evidence. How so? We have…
Against
Concerning Genetic Entropy, "Recent reports on the human genome provide powerful support for the biblical history of Creation and Fall. We are unable to reproduce ourselves without making multiple genome copying errors every generation. As a result our genomes are decaying…
Oh boy... Well, my arguments stand. I await your response.
478.
Darwinian natural selection is a weak explanation for evolution
For
"Why do I have to bear the Burden of Proof? " "If you wanted to argue from this standpoint you should clarify in Round 1 that Con has to take on the full burden of proof. " The title of the debate is "The Darwinian Mechanism for Evolution is a Weak Hypothesis". My opening…
"I would also point out that not proposing an alternate theory for evolution weakens your position. " There's no logical connection. The strength of a hypothesis relies on its own merits, Not on those of some other hypothesis. "Induced mutation leads to evolution [2]" Those…
Against
So before we muddle anything up I'd just like to note that evolution does not claim to explain the origin of life (AKA abiogenesis). It merely claims to explain how life changes and adapts. With that said let's talk about "New genes". You don't need to create brand new genes to…
We both agree that evolution happens. We both agree that genes mutate. We will debate not if evolution happens, Rather WHY it happens. The current explanation for evolution- Genes slightly mutate over time. Some of these mutations bring about changes to an animal that help it…
479.
Aliens are likely to be hostile toward humanity
For
Oh, no problem darling [Im from the UK]. Con has aptly ignored first round as acceptance, but that's OK, no harm done. I like a challenge. Given this is an almost entirely theoretical topic, there is difficulty in providing empirical data. Making predictions about EBI's or…
Discourse on First Contact: Aliens are Likely to be Hostile [Continued] [Note] This is a debate continued from my previous profile. I will be assuming the mantle of pro, arguing that it is in our best interest to expect a hostile or contentious first contact event with…
Against
There have been many cases in history people are scared of something and in that fear they take steps which in turn cause their fear to come true. If we are prepared for an attack then the aliens will most likely see it as a challenge, or that we are threatening them. It's in…
We are assuming that the ET's have life as we know it. I will concede about the nature of life, but that is the nature of life on Earth. We have no idea how any other beings live. Their incentive may be to just explore, see what's beyond their galaxy. I agree that they'd have…
480.
The Earth is more than 10,000 years old
For
Bouncing this debate back to CT so he may have 2 rounds to argue.
Preface I am going to defend this resolution almost exclusively from radiometric dating. As I see much more value in assessing one method at length than affirming multiple methods but not adequately supporting them. Thus I will be detailing uranium-lead dating, which while not…
Against
Accepted. Operational science is definitely in agreement with the Biblical age of the Earth. I look forward to a civilised and fruitful exchange.
Rebuttal of Pro's Case Pro's case rests entirely on the validity of the assumptions behind the process of formulating an age for a given rock using radioisotope dating. The three main assumptions which I will be addressing, in the context of U-Pb dating, are: initial isotope…
481.
Human-caused global warming is a myth
For
First id like to evaluate some of my opponents statements. "However, humans cause the major changes in climate change that we are witnessing. So, since natural cycles caused the prior climatic changes, I do not need to debate your first statements. " Please, explain to me how,…
First I would just like to state that I do believe global warming exists. I also believe that global cooling exists. Both cooling cycles are a result of natural phenomena that has occurred since the beginning of time. I would first like to examine the history of warming/cooling…
Against
Okay, since we are now in round 3, I will post my rebuttals to our arguments. Natural phenomena has been the case of Global Warming in the past. Now, our current global warming is caused by humans, and to PROVE this is the pace at which global warming is happening. In the past,…
Global warming has been caused by natural cycles and is probably causing the warming we see now by a small extent. However, humans cause the major changes in climate change that we are witnessing. So, since natural cycles caused the prior climatic changes, I do not need to…
482.
Age does not significantly affect intelligence
For
Hello everybody and Mr.Cons.Before I move on I would like to tell that I am not good in English but I will try.So as the topic states I would like to define some words. 1.Age : only the people less than 20 years old because nows a day many problems focus on these group…
Against
Age is not the only factor that affects one's intelligence but it does have a significant affect. A brain is not fully developed until age twenty five. source:http://www.academic.marist.edu... This has a significant effect on one's decision making, problem solving, ability to…
I once again have nothing to reply to.
483.
Modern humans have existed for less than 200,000 years
For
"The author never suggests that this same analytical approach can be used to extrapolate population growth throughout the ages." This is true. The first link I gave only gave the doubling numbers for the past three centuries. But using this data there would be an impossible…
I will quote my opponent and then respond to what he has to say underneath the quote. "First, in order to do a calculation, data is required. The first census in the United States was in 1790. There are no prehistorical records or estimates of populations across the globe. Even…
Against
My opponent has made the following arguments: 1. Extrapolation of data from the past 300 years is a valid method to use for prehistory. 2. That the average 20 year life span mentioned in my previous argument "may or may not be correct" even though a citation was listed 3. The…
Argument: Population Growth My opponent pointed out that the citation he included in his argument demonstrates that populations growth at a doubling rate of approximately 45 years. First, no where in the article does it say that all populations since man has walked on the Earth…
484.
The claim that 97% of scientists agree on human-caused warming is false
For
Con has forfited the round. My argument stands, Vote Pro. Con has forfited the round. My argument stands, Vote Pro. --------------------------------Further, I wanted to include some peer-review against cook's paper.Climate Consensus and 'Misinformation': A Rejoinder to…
As I stated before, and as you mentioned the primary source of this claim is cited from "Cook et al. (2013).It is from "Cook et al. (2013) that we get the claim, and quoting from the Abstract, "Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position…
Against
Let me jump right in. You claim that the 97% of scientists absolutely do not side with the notion that global warming is man-made. Quite the opposite, the issue of global warming is a fatal by-product from years of pollution and toxic waste dumping that has called for a need…
485.
Extraterrestrial life must exist in an infinite universe
For
--REBUTTAL-- As my opponent spent the last round refuting my refutations, I will refute his rebuttals to my refutations in this round. -- "Think about it this way. 5=5. 10=10. Infinity=infinity. Go ahead and imagine a person picking candy an infinite number of times. Keep in…
Let's look first to my opponents observation: "In order for my opponent to win, me must PROVE that extraterrestrial life MUST exist in an infinite universe. " I agree. That is the resolution, that is what I intend to prove. "For the sake of the debate, I will agree [that the…
Against
My opponent has generalized my arguments quite a bit. I hate to waste your time by repeat things that have already been said, so please keep in mind the things which I stated in the last round. Some points of clarification -I know the Earth is not a closed system. Please stop…
Greetings all. This is quite the interesting topic. It reminds me of a certain recent family guy episode. Go watch the multiverse episode on hulu, NOW. Its hilarious. Anyways, lets have a good debate! Unfortunately, I am quite pressed for time right now. I am only going to read…
486.
Naturalistic evolution is more probable than biblical creationism
For
I am camping in Blackwater falls, so I can't post. Sorry.
Rationality & Strong Evidence vs Weak EvidenceBefore we delve into the science of evolutionary biology, it is important first to examine the broader processes that subsume science, naturalism, and logic. They are themselves rooted in the tradition of rationalism that had its…
Against
I would like to ask voters to tie this debate. I feel this is the only fair thing to do considering my opponent's circumstances.
I dont want to put my opponent at a disadvantage. I want this debate to be fair. So, I am leaving this round blank until he posts again, or we redo this debate.
487.
Colonizing the Moon would not be worth it for humanity
For
1. Yes the moon may have earthly resources but it dose not have trees nor farmland and once again we have no idea what amount of the resources the moon has it may not be a lot. 2. Speed is effective in warfare but their is so much more to it than that strategy strength…
Because the Chinese are two seconds faster than us dose not make them a threat also global warming has very little evidence supporting it also famine deforestation the moon isn't really a great farming community and if you haven't noticed it has no forrest so that would be like…
Against
1. Pro agrees 2. Pro agrees 4. Pro agrees Most of the agruements I make the Pro drops or agrees with me. Since the Pro agrees with me on most than I see mothing but a Con balot. Thank you American5 for you time.
1. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the moon was once part of Earth. Earth has resources, so the moon should have some aswell. 2. Supercomputer, being faster is everything. If you are faster you have a beter econ and military. Pro drops India arguement and doesn't refute the U.S.…
488.
Humanity must expand into space
For
Allow me to start my arguments. 1) In sure human survival. Expanding to as many planets as possible will subsequently give humans a much greater chance of survival. At the current moment, we are on one planet, and if said planet is destroyed, humans will be extinct. One day, if…
For this debate I assert that humans will have to expand into space one day, and the sooner the better. Humans should begin to terraform Mars, and start to invest massive amounts of money towards space-oriented technology.
Against
I would like to first note that my opponent's reference to expansion is referring to human colonization. This has been clarified through private messages. "1) In sure human survival." I'll assume my opponent meant ENSURE human survival. "Expanding to as many planets as possible…
I assert that Human expansion into space is unnecessary. My opponent has not stated the reasons as to why we should expand and colonize space, so I have nothing to refute thus far. I ask my opponent to offer further argumentation in Round 2, where I shall offer refutation and…
489.
Evolution is the best explanation for biodiversity
For
I saw your debate on this topic with another user, but didn't feel like that person did the argument justice (which isn't to trash him/her - it's just my personal opinion). If you'd be willing to accept, I'd like to discuss this with you. Rules: 1) Be respectful.2) Formulate…
My opponent states that "they are. .. did lose the ability to fly, this wouldn't prove evolution as a valid theory. What I was referring to was the specific complexity of the feathers and muscles that match those of flying birds. Feathers, most notably, are incredibly complex…
Against
I will quote my opponent and then respond to what he wrote underneath of it. "And obviously I never claimed that this fact alone proved evolution because, as I said, science doesn't prove things." I think my opponent and I agree on the first point. The complexity of the wings…
1. Vestigial Structures: My opponent states that "they are clearly designed to be wings." As I recall, that is something a proponent of intelligent design might say. Aside from that, I think that my opponent is assuming a lot here. It is quite possible that the wings were…
490.
Human morality evolved through natural selection
For
You said: "I believe this is untrue is because natural selection hasn't influenced species that evolved considerably" This sentence is a contradiction. You said that you believe that natural selection (evolution) hasn't influenced that evolved considerably (from evolution). Oh…
You said: "Remember that I am not doing you a service by debating against you, And that we all stand to benefit from a fair debate. I accept wise, Not scathing criticism" I am attacking your ideas, Not you. I am justified to do so. That is the point of a debate. You said: "If…
Against
"I said cannibalism weeded humans out from evolution because of a disease it gave them. This doesn't happen with black widows, So evolution doesn't weed them out for it. You can say it's immoral if you want. But that's spider morality so it doesn't matter plus the male does it…
I seriously get that severe tone again. I wonder why you make this so intense, But it is evident that there is no point in pointing that out to you. "I already told you that evolution does not FORCE people to be moral. People do whatever they want and natural selection favors…
491.
Gödel's incompleteness theorem is meaningless
For
the debate is very simple just tell us what Godel says makes a maths statement true if you cant then the term "true " in this statement is meaningless "...there is an arithmetical statement that is *true*..." thus his theorem is meaningless
Australia's leading erotic poet colin leslie dean points out Godel cant tell us what makes a mathematical statement true-thus his theorem is meaningless http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com... Godel says there are true statements which can be proven http://en.wikipedia.org...…
Against
In the previous round I argued that Gödel proves there are true statements which cannot be proven by showing that neither a statement nor its negation is true. Since one or the other must be true, he proved that all mathematics using a small bit of number theory is incomplete.…
I've previously debated this topic with my opponent, but not very well. I'll attempt tackle this again, hopefully with more clarity. My opponent claims that "Godel cant tells us what makes a maths statement true-thus his theorem is meaningless." [sic] His argument, then,…
492.
Humanity's future should not depend on space colonization
For
Thus far, your argument has failed to distinguish between exploration and colonization. My thesis deals specifically with the latter.I'm not denying that we've sent people into space, and I'm certainly not disputing that we still have technology in space. In my original…
I assume you read my opening thesis argument. To reiterate: We are debating whether humanity will successfully colonize other planets/moons with human citizens and establish self-sustaining bases there.We have indeed learned many things from space, and many of us are, indeed,…
Against
"I'm not denying that we've sent people into space, and I'm certainly not disputing that we still have technology in space. In my original argument, I made the distinction between merely flying to the moon and actually building a colonizable base on the moon. I rambled on about…
I am not going to jump straight into rebuttals, seeing as to how you know my entire argument, inside and out. "I assume you read my opening thesis argument. To reiterate: We are debating whether humanity will successfully colonize other planets/moons with human citizens and…
493.
The orthodox solution to the Monty Hall problem is wrong
For
For the purposes of this debate, the Monty Hall riddle is the following: Suppose you are walking down the street and someone calls your attention to a set of three closed doors. This person--we'll call them The Host hereafter--offers you a large sum of money if you can guess…
"In the riddle (and like all riddles), the answer is based off of the information we are aware of. The host' use of multiple strategies is not part of the Monty Hall riddle my opponent typed in round 1." The above is the crux of my opponent's objection to my previous argument.…
Against
With that said, let us proceed. Let us assume that you ignore what the host does and choose the door you originally believe to be the correct door. When you chose, the 3 doors were equally likely, so you win the car with probability 1/3. Now lets back up for a moment and assume…
My opponent states that I tell you that his argument relies on an assumption that is not implied in the original riddle. This is absolutely correct, as he is making the assumption that the host may have some kind of deceptive agenda. Furthermore, he is the one to insinuate that…
494.
Evolution is more probable than creationism
For
My opponent is wrong.Why?1. Creationism is Bible.2. Bible is God.3. God is dog.4. Dog exhibit homosexual behavior.5. Therefore Creationism is related to gay.
Unfortunately since I have forfeited the last couple of rounds, I must concede, my burden of proof wouldn't be meeted correctly without my losing a significant amount of votes.I have conceded because:1. Moving cities has cause my schedule to change.2. My schedule changing has…
Against
creationism is in no way related to gay behaviour. Its irrelevant to this debate. Since there is not much else for me to do, I will refute my opponents chain of logic.1. Creationism is Bible.2. Bible is God.3. God is dog.4. Dog exhibit homosexual behavior.5. Therefore…
I accept Pro's forfeit, but not his plea for votes. He believes that I should be penalised for not believing in the legalisation of gay marriage. Completely irrelevant to this debate. I urge voters to vote for what happens in this debate and not outside of it. Nevertheless, I…
495.
Space exploration is a waste of time and money
For
apparently chuck_norris doesn't want to argue with me, so i will stop
Against
vCHEN HAS FORFEITED WHICH MEANS THIS DEBATE IS OVER
chunky munkey
496.
The Big Bang theory is scientifically sound
For
Rebuttals My opponent all but forifieted here "Yes the big bang is probably the reason that our universe exists in its present state"However. My opponent has just disregarded nearly my entire argument. Let's review the topic at hand. The Big Bang theory is a scientifically…
Definitions. From the Oxford Dictionary.Big Bang · "the rapid expansion of matter from a state of extremely high density and temperature that according to current cosmological theories marked the origin of the universe. A fireball of radiation at extremely high temperature and…
Against
You say that you do not have to explain what caused the big bang and that you must only prove that it is scientifically sound. However if you cannot explain what caused it in what way is it sound? Yes the big bang is probably the reason that our universe exists in its present…
Based on my understanding of things I would personally argue against the big bang theory being a scientifically sound theory in terms of explaining the origin of the universe. I feel there is a fundamental problem to be addressed. The big bang theory does not explain the origin…
497.
Evolution better explains humanity than intelligent design
For
Evolution has many supporting factors that, in weighing all of the ideas on the origin of life, push it above all of the other origin points. I am not saying that it is one hundred percent undeniably the only source, but the margin between it and the next best thought…
Against
I am disappointed that my opponent failed to post his argument this round, so I will not post one this round either.
I accept your challenge. Firstly I would like to distinguish macro-evolution from micro-evolution. As you probably already know, macro-evolution is generally what the theory of evolution refers to. It is the change from one species to another over a long period of time.…
498.
Space exploration is a waste of money and time
For
'It does sound unrealistic but It is very likely to happen' Red herring-even if this were the case, the debate is on whether it SHOULD be the case, not whether it will be. Furthermore, you appear to agree with my summary of your position with this statement. Potential voters…
'ok. .. so first of all are you trying to say we should kill people to decrease the population? ' I am saying that given that the earth's population could potentially increase to the point where the average person lives in squalor, a mass curb of the planets population might…
Against
It does sound unrealistic but It is very likely to happen. It sounded impossible when we first planned to land on the moon until Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin became the first humans to land on any heavenly body outside earth when they landed on the moon on July 20th, 1969.…
ok... so first of all are you trying to say we should kill people to decrease the population? We cannot predict the what would happen to the earth in the future. Something bad can happen (e.g Global warming, H1N1) so we need to explore and find a backup just in case the earth…
499.
Genetic modification of animals is not beneficial to humanity
For
I claim that genetic engineering of animals will not benefit humanity. We believe this because many animals are mutilated or even killed before a successful clone is made There were a total of 277 attempts to clone Dolly before scientists succeeded. Only a 5% average of cloned…
Against
First I think I should clarify what genetic modification is. Genetic modification according to the CSIRO is "the use of modern biotechnology techniques to change the genes of an organism, such as a plant or animal." I am going to assume that you include cloning as an example of…
I suppose my opponent has forfeited the debate.
500.
A finite past does not prove the universe had a beginning
For
Moving Along...
Thank you for the honorable concession... Moving along.
Against
- extended -
Rather than waste my opponent's time further, I concede the debate. I confess to having not sufficiently studied the theories of time before; I was aware of the two main theories in summary form, but not in the detail that I went into this evening. It has been interesting, but…

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?

Science Debate Topics for Students — page 10

How to use these debate topics

Run them live

More question collections