Instigator / Pro
7
1644
rating
64
debates
65.63%
won
Topic
#3043

By the 19th Century, Evidence Already Showed Earth is NOT Flat

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
0
Better sources
2
0
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
0

After 1 vote and with 6 points ahead, the winner is...

Undefeatable
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
1,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
1
1697
rating
556
debates
68.17%
won
Description

Pro and Con cannot use any evidence from after the year 1900 MD. I will prove the Earth is NOT flat using only proofs from before 1900, therefore making it impossible to rely on NASA.

Burden of Proof is shared.

-->
@RationalMadman

to be fair, this was not a direct challenge, but a trickier version of my last debate in case someone like Benjamin wanted to accept.

I am not as malicious as I seem -- think of me as a trickster.

RMM
Umm... this: "If you seriously want a debate with me on an in-deptg topic don't add asinine rukes and traps character limits." I gave you that opportunity you didn't take it, don't make excuses when you've literally been given everything you wanted and still refused to engage. Plus, its the principle of the matter.

-->
@Theweakeredge

I am not debating against you here so what does that matter?

RMM
Don't pull that shit bud - I gave you that opportunity and you failed to even try to accept it - don't think lying will go unnoticced.

-->
@Undefeatable

If you seriously want a debate with me on an in-deptg topic don't add asinine rukes and traps character limits.

You're just looking for a cheap win and since most voters don't graso that ships going into the horizon isn't them going over the curve even on a curved Earth (because it's too near to be completely over) I don't see what exactly you wanted here other than a cheap victory. I don't appreciate how you've been talking to me in our past few debates and if you keep it up I'll just block you.

Makes you wonder what undedeatable's intentions were woth this debate. Just a rude and asinine tone throughout with a 1k character trap. Pathetic as fuck.

RMM

Obviously - the fact that its closer to 1900 means literally nothing, for example, 9/11 happened in 2001, the fact that it happened very closer to 1999 does not mean it happened in the 20th century. It happened in the 21st century, proximity to other centuries nonwithstanding

-->
@Theweakeredge

So if you prove something in 1898 that was proven by the 1800s?

RMM

They certainly aren't - in this context "by" means up until and including, etc, etc - which is fairly intuitive.

-->
@Theweakeredge

By and before are synonyms in that context.

RMm

Good thing the resolution is talking about BY the 19th century and not BEFORE the 19th century. Jesus, your so disingenuously semantic its really annoying

-->
@Theweakeredge

1899 is 19th Century, not before 19th Century.

Con can use evidence after 1900 alright. It is not like Con could provide any examples that actually stands.

Rmm

Do you just... have a problem with reading - BEFORE 1900! As in evidence BEFORE the year of 1900, as in 1899 and back! Seriously, how hard is it for you to grasp? I legitimately do not think you ar being serious rn

-->
@Theweakeredge

the 19th century begins in 1800, not 1900.

Rmm

Yes - why do you think he says he will only use evidence from BEFORE 1900?! You know, the 19th century? Are you actually READING, because it doesn't seem like you are. He doesn't say "the 1900s", he specifically says ONLY USING EVIDENCE FROM BEFORE 1900

-->
@RationalMadman

I wanted to make it 1500's but realized circumnavigation was after that, so 1800/1900 wouldn't matter in my opinion.

-->
@Theweakeredge

The resolution says 19th century which is the 1800s, not 1900s.

RMM-
Um... because its the resolution? Yeah it does - because only by handicapping himself to this extent can he get you to actually try to prove your point

-->
@Theweakeredge

nice to see you concede that it matters.

RMM
". I will prove the Earth is NOT flat using only proofs from before 1900,"

Nah - its not like he stipulated that in his description or anything, that DEFINITELY didn't happen

-->
@Undefeatable

19th century is 1800s by the way.

-->
@RationalMadman

I cannot use NASA. What more could you ask for?