On Earth The Sun Actually Rises In The West And Sets In The East
All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.
With 4 votes and 2 points ahead, the winner is ...
- Publication date
- Last update date
- Category
- Nature
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Voting system
- Open voting
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Four points
- Rating mode
- Rated
- Characters per argument
- 10,000
*Rules*
1. The definitions below are agreed to by accepting the debate.
2. All votes *must* have thorough reasons for voting.
3. Moderators *must* remove inadequate votes that a) fail to address the majority of resolution-impacting points made by both debaters, b) are lies about debater performance, or c) are vendetta votes/overtly biased.
4. Death23 and his related accounts may not vote on or participate in this debate.
------
*Full Resolution*
On earth, the sun actually rises in the west and sets in the east.
Pro
Has 3 rounds each with a 10,000 character limit + 3 days to post.
Pro also has the BoP to show that on earth, the sun actually rises in the west and sets in the east.
Con
Has 3 rounds each with a 10,000 character limit + 3 days to post.
Con also has to negate Pro's claims in order to cast enough doubt on the resolution.
------
*Definitions*
on - physically in contact with and supported by.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/on
earth - the third planet from the sun in the solar system, orbiting between Venus and Mars at an average distance of 149.6 million km from the sun, on which we live.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/earth
sun - the star around which the earth orbits.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/sun
actually - as the truth or facts of a situation; really.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/actually
rises - appears above the horizon (to an observer).
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/rise
west - denoting the western part of a specified area.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/west
sets - appears to move toward and below the horizon (to an observer).
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/set
east - denoting the eastern part of a specified area.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/east
Axial TiltSome planets, such as Mercury, Venus, and Jupiter, have axes that are almost completely perpendicular, or straight up-and-down.Earth's axis is not perpendicular. It has an axial tilt, or obliquity. Axial tilt is the angle between the planet's rotational axis and its orbital axis. A planet's orbital axis is perpendicular to to the ecliptic or orbital plane, the thin disk surrounding the sun and extending to the edge of the solar system.Earth's axial tilt (also known as the obliquity of the ecliptic) is about 23.5 degrees. Due to this axial tilt, the sun shines on different latitudes at different angles throughout the year. This causes the seasons.Uranus has the largest axial tilt in the solar system. Its axis is tilted about 98 degrees, so its north pole is nearly on its equator. Astronomers suspect that this extreme tilt was caused by a collision with an Earth-sized planet billions of years ago, soon after Uranus formed.Axial PrecessionEarth's axis appears stable, but it actually wobbles very slowly, like a spinning top. It takes Earth's axis about 26,000 years to complete a circular "wobble." This wobble is called axial precession.Earth’s axis helps determine the North Star, and axial precession helps change it. Currently, for instance, Earth's axis points toward a star called Polaris. Polaris, which gets its name because it is almost directly above the North Pole, is the current North Star.Polaris will not always be the North Star, however. The Earth's axis is slowly wobbling away from Polaris. In another 13,000 years, it will point toward the new North Star, a star called Vega.
Chronometers Changed the GameThe pendulum clock was developed during the 17th century. However, these clocks were not sufficiently accurate to be used at sea to determine longitude and for scientific time measurement in the 18th century.In 1764, the chronometer was invented. Chronometers measured time accurately in spite of motion or varying conditions, and became popular instruments among many merchant mariners during the 19th century.Clocks Based on the SunEven after the chronometer many towns and cities set clocks based on sunsets and sunrises. Dawn and dusk occur at different times, but time differences between distant locations were barely noticeable before the 19th century because of long travel times and the lack of long-distance communications.The use of local solar time became increasingly awkward as railways and telecommunications improved. Time zones were, therefore, a compromise, relaxing the complex geographic dependence while still allowing local time to be approximate with mean solar time.
GPS Shows Different MeridianSince everyone is running around with their own GPS tracker or mobile phones with GPS capability, a visit to the Royal Observatory in Greenwich, London may have become a slightly disappointing affair for some. The observatory is home to the Airy Transit Circle, a telescope designed by George Biddell Airy in the 19th century, which marks the location of the prime meridian, the line running along 0° of longitude, where the Earth's western and eastern hemispheres meet.However, if you follow your GPS device to 0° longitude, you will end up a good distance away from the famous line marking the meridian in the observatory's Meridian Courtyard. So, have they been luring tourists to the wrong place for decades?Not Wrong, Just DifferentYes and no. It is true that the meridian that runs through the observatory has lost its status as the world's sole reference point for longitude. Navigation systems such as the GPS now use the IERS Reference Meridian (IRM), which runs about 334 feet (102 meters) east of the observatory.However, although the world is now using an updated version, the location of the prime meridian is not wrong as such—it's just a different kind of meridian. It is defined by the location of the telescope, which was originally used to measure the passage of certain stars to feed data into an astronomical coordinate system, which, in its day, served as the basis for global navigation and timekeeping. Since the location of this original prime meridian is defined by the location of the telescope, it cannot be wrong: it is always where the telescope is.Arbitrary LocationTo understand how there can be two different prime meridians, both being in the correct location for their purposes, it's important to bear in mind that meridians and longitudes are a human invention, so there is essentially no right or wrong way to place them. While latitudes are defined by the Earth's shape and movement—the poles at 90° latitude are where the Earth's axis meets the Earth's surface and the equator at 0° latitude marks the middle point between the poles—there is no natural reason for any longitude to be used as the prime meridian.At the International Meridian Conference in 1884, with multiple candidates to choose from, that honor was bestowed upon the longitude of the Airy Transit Circle in Greenwich. Apart from serving as a navigational reference point, the local mean time at the Greenwich Meridian now also served as the basis for the global time standard, Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), before being replaced by UTC in the 1960s.
"I will not only decimate your case, but I'll further chip away until all that's left is regret for daring to troll a masterful debater as myself."
"Debate properly or concede don't even attempt to make a joke of me..."
"The first thing I'm going to do is..."
"...point out that the 'West'...is in fact closer to being east of the 'East'"
"Now, there's no direct flights from the east of Asia to west of USA"
"I'm stating facts, so what we find is [flights] stop over at Middle East"
"What's quite undeniable is that Asia is, without a doubt, indeed, East of the Americas if we want to be exact."
"We can say North vs South dichotomy is less relative than West and East"
"You will see that 'Eastern Hemisphere' and 'Western Hemisphere' are purely invented by us, humans, as a social construct."
"All that aside, Pro will find that 'actually' the sun sets on the west just as much as it rises on [the west] and sets in the east just as much as rises on it."
I love to debate truisms that seem false...false falsisms I guess they're called?I also love that scientific concepts can be looked at differently.
Imagine a tiny version of yourself standing in the middle of the wooden disk. And imagine that the outside rim of the disk represents your horizon. On Summer Solstice, you would see the Sun rise on your "horizon" at the eastern point of the longest track. It would follow the track high in your sky, and eventually set on the western horizon. It would be up for about 17 "hours", thus making summertime days long and warm. On the Winter Solstice, you would observe the Sun rising at the western end of the smallest track. It wouldn't rise high in the sky, and would be up for only about 6 or 7 hours, making your days short on daylight and cold. At the Spring and the Fall equinoxes, the Sun would rise at the east end of the middle track and set at the west end. Your days would be exactly half daylight and half nighttime and you would experience typical warm/cool spring and fall climates.
The Sun, the Moon, the planets, and the stars all rise in the east and set in the west. And that's because Earth spins -- toward the east.For a moment, let us ignore Earth's orbit around the Sun (as well as the Sun's and solar system's revolution around the center of the Galaxy, and even the Galaxy's journey through the universe). For the moment, let us just think about one motion - - Earth's spin (or rotation) on its axis.Earth rotates or spins toward the east, and that's why the Sun, Moon, planets, and stars all rise in the east and make their way westward across the sky. Suppose you are facing east - the planet carries you eastward as it turns, so whatever lies beyond that eastern horizon eventually comes up over the horizon and you see it!
"You will see that 'Eastern Hemisphere' and 'Western Hemisphere' are purely invented by us, humans, as a social construct...I am willing to play along with Pro's social construct...I am going to prove what we did to make the socially constructed West and East operate...Pro will find that 'actually' the sun sets on the west just as much as it rises on it."
"I say that if you are on the Western Hemisphere, the sun both rises and sets for you"
"The Japanese observe sunsets...Asia is, without a doubt, indeed, East of the Americas."
"if you are on the socially constructed Eastern Hemisphere, [the sun both rises and sets for you]."
"The rising and setting are defined as visual to the Horizon in the debate description."
- Pro has to prove that the sun actually rises on 'the west' and actually sets on 'the east' on Earth. There is no 'East' or 'West' on Earth in absolute poles or hemispheres beyond social construct meaning it is not 'actual' at all. Thus, the only forms of west and east are either relative to your current position or socially constructed ones that hold the Greenwich Median as their centre and which timezones revolve around.
- In the definitions that the debate description has (which are the only ones sacred to the debate if a later one conflicts them since both debaters agreed to the description, not to later content) says that the West is the 'Western part of a designated area' and East is the 'Eastern part of a designated area'. Thus, following from 1, we see that every day in the socially constructed West and East, the Sun actually rises first and foremost to the Earth/world in the East (due to socially constructed timezones and world spinning anti-clockwise around itself AND ALSO anticlockwise around the sun according to NASA as previously shown, if you need a source for both here: https://www.spaceacademy.net.au/library/notes/anticlok.htm, https://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/StarFAQ1.htm#q26) and that the Sun actually sets on Earth/world on the West due to the exact same reasoning as why it rises on the East.
- If one then points at me, Con, and says 'hold up, they don't actually count as there is no actual East or West on Earth other than relative to your position' then I win further as I point out the definition of 'set' and 'rise' are such that no matter where you are, the Sun rises on your East and sets on your West but that the resolution is what Pro has to uphold as absolutely correct and not incorrect.
- The Western Hemisphere is both east of and west of the Eastern Hemisphere which alone decimates Pro's case as Con wins if the Earth has no true West or East.
Block's RFD:
It is clear that this debate was meant to troll anyone willing to participate in it. The debate topic was ridiculous prima facie and i can not see how a serious point could have ever been made from either side. This was made clear throughout Pro's arguments and i must take those statements into account when voting in the over all debate, however I will try to be as objective as possible when it comes to awarding points.
Points for convincing argument: (TIE) I can not award either side full points for their arguments due to the simple fact that neither had an argument that was good or serious enough to convince me that their argument is in anyway more valid than the other. It is exceedingly difficult to make a serious argument on a ridiculous topic.
Reliable Sources: (CON) While the merit of both Con's and Pro's arguments are dubious at best, Con did manage to use sources that have a reputation for being reliable, objective, and substantive in his argument; and did so in a way that didn't muddy up his stance.
Spelling and Grammar: (TIE) Based on my understanding, in regards to spelling and grammar, i can not categorically state whether or not one side's was significantly better then the others.
Conduct: (CON) When engaging in an amicable debate it is imperative that both sides refrain from using devious tactics which could taint the overall debate. This is especially true when it is the sole reason for instigating a debate. Debates should be used as a method of exchanging ideas in an effort to grow both parties understanding on a given topic. However even though Con seems to have accepted this debate in good faith, it seems that Pro's original intent was simply to score points. Neither side benefited from this debate and that is a fault i attribute to Pros conduct and therefore must award this point to Con.
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Block19 // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 3 points to Con for sources and conduct
>Reason for Decision: [posted above]
>Reason for Mod Action: Conduct was insufficiently justified as the voter failed to show the conduct violation was "excessive." Sources was insufficiently justified as the voter failed to analyze any source in particular and as the voter failed to make any comparative statement regarding each debater's use and/or quality of sources.
************************************************************************
Weird, two people in the last two days have both put up a vote on this debate, and for both of them it's their only activity...
Block19
BossChick_23
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Block19 // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 7 points to Con for arguments, sources, s/g and conduct
>Reason for decision: cause yeah
>Reason for Mod Action: None of the points are explained and thus is insufficient.
************************************************************************
I have nothing against MagicAintReal, we had a very pleasant conversation before i cast this vote and must ask that people not judge his character based on this one debate.
It's ok!
I apologize for the way in which i submitted my vote. I was informed after i posted my vote that i did so in a way that went against the rules of this forum.
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Block19 // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 5 points to Con for arguments, sources, and conduct.
>Reason for decision: Con addressed both sides of the issue properly and behaved more honorably than Pro did when they instigated this discussion. Con also used better and more objective sources, for these reasons i have awarded the following points.
>Reason for Mod Action: None of the points are explained and thus is insufficient.
************************************************************************
Sorry but I don't vote unless I'm a judge. I just don't care who wins.
Did you read the actual arguments or just focus on some words?
I read Pro's opening argument, and immediately understood that he's a troll, and then read the beginning of both Con's opening argument, and Pro's R2, and realized they're both ad hom trolls, and this debate is useless and unworthy of reading, much less voting for. Good day.
Would appreciate a vote here thanks.
Would highly appreciate a vote here.
Well this is not replying to anyone specific, though it may seem directly relevant to things that have been posted here, I assure you it is not, but if Con were to have shown how the japanese are not in the east then why didn't the voter mention that?
I showed how the Japanese are not in the East and that there is no East or West of Earth in actuality.
Hey person I just first talked to in the comments section of my debate on Conifers being superior organisms to humans.
Perhaps you could elaborate on your vote and explain how Con showed that the Japanese don't experience sunsets...
Would be interested in your votes here. Cheers.
"To Raltar, and myself, there is genuinely a direct link between what my source said and what I was getting at."
This is EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID:
"Just observe the following video in the following link: https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/index.html You will see that 'Eastern Hemisphere' and 'Western Hemisphere' are purely invented by us, humans, as a social construct whereas Northern and Southern hemisphere are arguably undeniable so long as the Earth is as presented to us by NASA."
You get source points for this video because "when Con states that the Eastern and Western hemispheres are social constructs, ***he both links to and quotes*** from a source which says ****exactly that*
This isn't misinterpreting.
This is just someone trying to vote your side arbitrarily and making up points where there aren't any.
Between the two of us, I was the one who manned up by accepting this debate and fighting it how I did. We both know who the coward was here. I don't think you respect people's ability to interpret (and misinterpret) things. To Raltar, and myself, there is genuinely a direct link between what my source said and what I was getting at. To me, there's a direct link between there being no actual East or West area of Earth to 'be in' and the resolution being proven false via Kritik.
To three of the four voters, my angle was too weak, to me it was indomitable. I am not here crying about them.
I repeat the vote:
"when Con states that the Eastern and Western hemispheres are social constructs, ***he both links to and quotes*** from a source which says ****exactly that***."
The link you just gave, which isn't the one you gave for "social constructs" in the debate, only mentions axis and never mentions anything socially constructed or the word hemisphere.
Man up, sir.
You are quoting a source I used to add to it, the source he's referring to is this:
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/axis/
which has in it proof that only north and south are actual poles or 'the north' or 'the south' actual dichotomy-relevant things to consider on Earth.
No I'm serious.
If he gave you source points for linking to something that said EXACTLY "the Eastern and Western hemispheres are social constructs" and your link did none of the sort, then why can't you own that and have him remove the vote.
You have 3 voters lying for you since they don't understand how I won by liquidating there being 'the west' or 'the east' so between the two of us, you're not the one who should be salty.
I want you to know that Raltar lied and I have the proof, please be honest about it and ask him to not vote.
Your boy Raltar said:
"For example, when Con states that the Eastern and Western hemispheres are social constructs, he both links to and quotes from a source which says *exactly that*."
Are you aware of the source you provided for that?
Do you wanna make a bet if it mentions social constructs?
I do.
Here's the link that says "exactly" what you said about social constructs.
https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/index.html
Man up and admit he's lying for you.
Also not mentioned in that vote, shockingly!
Con:
"All that aside, Pro will find that 'actually' the sun sets on the west just as much as it rises on it and sets in the east just as much as rises on it."
Con doubled down on this too.