Instigator / Pro
14
1566
rating
29
debates
56.9%
won
Topic

We should avert climate change rather than adjusting to it

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
6
0
Sources points
4
2
Spelling and grammar points
2
1
Conduct points
2
2

With 2 votes and 9 points ahead, the winner is ...

DynamicSquid
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Nature
Time for argument
Two days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
5,000
Contender / Con
5
1337
rating
26
debates
9.62%
won
Description
~ 0 / 5,000

No information

Added:
Instigator
--> @K_Michael

Got it. Thanks man.

Added:
--> @DynamicSquid

It's how you treat your opponent. If you're rude, that's bad. Thanking them for the time and effort is a good way to win conduct if the other person isn't rude, but isn't actively being a good participant either. I probably should have given you the point, but I think your overall score accurately describes how I thought you did. I could have gone into more depth about conduct in my vote, but It was getting long already.I wouldn't personally put as much effort into conduct as making sure you've researched well. Your argument is first and foremost important as it's worth the most points.

Added:
Instigator
--> @K_Michael

Oh, and I would also like to thank you for your insightful review/vote. It really helped me think about what I have stated and I will certainly keep that in mind for the future.

Question however:

I though conduct was the way you introduce your opponent. Thanking them for the time and effort at the beginning and end of a debate certainly counts, does it not?

Added:

Sources for my vote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_biodiversity
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth104/node/1345

Added:

Nah, I agree with you on the grounds of human pollution.

Added:
Instigator
--> @K_Michael

Hmm... intriguing inquiry. Would you be open for a debate with me on this exact issue about global warming? DM me if you're interested...

Added:
--> @DynamicSquid

Global warming (and climate change) are loaded words in today's politics. There are natural processes that cause trends of heat and cold over time. These natural processes can't really be averted by any human means I know of. If you're speaking of global warming as caused by human pollution, and you establish it pollution as bad (which it is), then it should obviously be averted. It's an open and shut case. Either global warming is a natural process, we can't avert it, and we had better try to adapt, or global warming is caused by human pollution, as should be averted.
So the real question being asked here is whether humans are causing global warming.

Added:
Instigator
--> @PaulVerliane

Paul, I just wanted to respond to your last point.

"well look at it this way no one is doing anythng to stop it we may as well get used to the changes because they are now unaviodable"

The motion is to assume that people are going to do something. The motion is giving us a choice, whether we should avert, or adjust to climate change. It is not referring to the current state of people's wishes. And yet if it were, you have not provided any evidence backing this up...

Added:
Instigator
--> @K_Michael

Oh yeah, sorry I didn't clarify on that. Climate change more specifically as global warming.

Added:
Contender

climate change is god judgment on a wicked humanity we cannot escape his wrath for our gluttony

Added:
--> @DynamicSquid

what definition are you using for climate change?